4 ms·
This in the comments of the page is a good response: http://lemire.me/blog/archives/2015/01/14/knauff-and-nejasmic-recommend-banning-latex/ http://lemire.me/blo
by jostylr 12y ago
This in the comments of the page is a good response: http://lemire.me/blog/archives/2015/01/14/knauff-and-nejasmic-recommend-banning-latex/ http://lemire.me/blog/archives/2015/01/14/knauff-and-nejasmi...
Essentially, the test is too limited for its purposes.
A huge advantage for LaTeX is the ability to copy and paste faithfully and modify easily. This is how novices learn. In Word, if you look at an example of something awesome, it tells you nothing on how to make it. With TeX, it is self-documenting on how to produce it and how to modify it.
Also, text tools can help greatly. One can easily integrate data sources piping text into these documents, handling tabular issues.
But the key is maintenance. If you need to make major changes, text documents are much easier to manage. TeX is used for documents that someone cares about, not some one-off letter to be written and forgotten. Though I would still prefer to use TeX even in that case, but I concede that that's just me.
- semi-extrinsic 12y agoNot only is the test limited, it is entirely irrelevant. A major advantage of (La)TeX is that the journal has a good LaTeX template in its Instructions for Authors, and you almost don't have to think about formatting. Certainly not about formatting references. These guys come across as high school students criticising Apple for having a flawed product design approach. The fact that they've never heard of version control systems says it all. I would like to propose a similar test, much more relevant to what scientists do in their jobs, where LaTeX would win hands down: Your paper was rejected from Journal A. You now want to submit it to Journal B. Your task is to convert the manuscript ao that it fits the Instructions for Authors for Journal B.