Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:50:36 +0200 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.12.9/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h6LMoXSb015892 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:50:34 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C34FDA.7FACC600" Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h6LMj6mp005773; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:45:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from listserv (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h6LM08Ml014531; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:43:35 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 0048 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:43:35 +0200 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (relay2.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.210.211]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h6LMhZM9014912 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:43:35 +0200 Received: from abacus.maths.uq.edu.au (abacus.maths.uq.edu.au [130.102.160.6]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h6LMi9Gl008109 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:44:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from kgs@localhost) by abacus.maths.uq.edu.au (8.11.3/8.11.3) id h6LMh1h17298 for LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 08:43:01 +1000 (EST) Return-Path: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jul 2003 22:50:36.0940 (UTC) FILETIME=[803C34C0:01C34FDA] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.28 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) X-Spam-Score: -3.9 () QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,QUOTE_TWICE_1 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: XML vs. (La)TeX markup Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 23:43:01 +0100 Message-ID: A<200307212243.h6LMh1h17298@abacus.maths.uq.edu.au> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: XML vs. (La)TeX markup Thread-Index: AcNP2oCHrr6w4gXzRcyoaCLeWNKbeg== From: "Ken Smith" To: Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4727 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C34FDA.7FACC600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Torsten Bronger wrote on Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:59:34 +0200 > Halloechen! > Boris Veytsman writes: > > JS> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 03:16:32 +0200 > > JS> From: Joachim Schrod > > > > > > JS> -- Actually, IMO the main disadvantage of TeX markup is the > > JS> shortage of skillfull people in the job market to implement = that > > JS> markup. That makes any manager worth his salary shy away from > > JS> TeX. For me, that's the main reason to use XML, I find more > > JS> people with the needed skills. > > > > This brings the question, which I hope is NOT off topic here. Why is > > the situatoion on the job market so skewed? I personally find TeX > > markup much more "natural" and easy than XML -- why do most people > > think otherwise? > It's very very difficult to parse arbitrary TeX. And it is very ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > difficult for authors to use a clearly defined subset of (La)TeX > that a certain parser could understand -- everybody wants to > "improve" the output with own fancy structures. I don't know whether it's still around on the Net somewhere, but several years ago someone posted a file named xii.tex When processed under plain TeX it output the familiar "Twelve Days of Christmas". But the author, whose name I've forgotten but was a well-known TeXpert, had managed to conceal all this under a maze of obscurity. Anyone wanting to try their hand at writing something to parse TeX should see how their program works on xii.tex [rest deleted] > Tschoe, > Torsten. > -- > Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus Ken Smith kgs@maths.uq.edu.au ------_=_NextPart_001_01C34FDA.7FACC600 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: XML vs. (La)TeX markup

Torsten Bronger <bronger@PHYSIK.RWTH-AACHEN.DE> = wrote on
Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:59:34 +0200

> Halloechen!

> Boris Veytsman <borisv@LK.NET> = writes:

> > JS> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 03:16:32 = +0200
> > JS> From: Joachim Schrod = <jschrod@ACM.ORG>
> >
> >
> > JS>  -- Actually, IMO the main = disadvantage of TeX markup is the
> > JS>  shortage of skillfull people = in the job market to implement that
> > JS>  markup.  That makes any = manager worth his salary shy away from
> > JS>  TeX. For me, that's the main = reason to use XML, I find more
> > JS>  people with the needed = skills.
> >
> > This brings the question, which I hope is = NOT off topic here. Why is
> > the situatoion on the job market so skewed? = I personally find TeX
> > markup much more "natural" and = easy than XML -- why do most people
> > think otherwise?

> It's very very difficult to parse arbitrary = TeX.  And it is very
  = ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> difficult for authors to use a clearly defined = subset of (La)TeX
> that a certain parser could understand -- = everybody wants to
> "improve" the output with own fancy = structures.

I don't know whether it's still around on the Net = somewhere, but
several years ago someone posted a file named = xii.tex
When processed under plain TeX it output the familiar = "Twelve Days of
Christmas".
But the author, whose name I've forgotten but was a = well-known
TeXpert, had managed to conceal all this under a maze = of obscurity.

Anyone wanting to try their hand at writing something = to parse TeX
should see how their program works on xii.tex

[rest deleted]

> Tschoe,
> Torsten.

> --
> Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus

Ken Smith
kgs@maths.uq.edu.au

------_=_NextPart_001_01C34FDA.7FACC600--