[Blindmath] Mark up languages VS wysiwyg editors: was: Re: Press Release: MathType 6.5 for Windows is available

[Michael Whapples]

Hello,
Whilst we are on this topic, I have some comments/questions.

One of the most common complaints about LaTeX is that it is hard to 
learn. Is this true or is it as Jason said about the Linux command line 
(quite some time in the past and I am not quite sure where) only because 
we tend to be introduced to Windows and get so much into the Windows GUI 
way (he was saying that in cases where people learn the Linux command 
line from the beginning it appears to be easier than Windows)? So could 
the teaching of LaTeX at an early stage (something in the past I said 
possibly not due to the time spent on it if they may not go on to use it 
again, I probably now mean even earlier than I was thinking in the past) 
would this actually be benefitial?

OK, may be the above is slightly idealistic, we have to work with what 
we have and unfortunately people tend to have been pushed on to the 
WYSIWYG software, so is there something simpler? This brings me to an 
email I recieved sometime ago regarding the RST format 
(http://docutils.sf.net/rst.html). Basically the email was talking about 
whether it would be possible to create a RST to Braille translator, but 
it did briefly mention possibly trying to add extra notation support eg. 
Math. Currently at the moment the only way to insert math into RST is to 
use raw directives and use either LaTeX or mathml, which leads to a 
fairly format specific solution. If a math system could be worked out 
for RST then it might be a good system for those used to WYSIWYG editors 
to start on mark up languages. Any thoughts on this? How possible might 
it be to create a good math system for RST?

Michael Whapples

On 04/12/08 09:25, Jason White wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 07:52:22AM +0000, P. R. Stanley wrote:
>    
>> Okay, logical layout. In any case, Jason, it's a far simpler and yet
>> effective option in the long run, wouldn't you agree?
>>      
>
> Yes, in the long run, it's well worth the investment, which is why I gave up
> on word processors a decade ago so as to use LaTeX instead. Several
> well-written articles have been published explaining why word processors, and
> the wysiwyg approach they embody, are often inadequate compared with logical
> markup and typesetting systems such as TeX/LaTeX.
>    
>> That's what I'm trying to get across here. I can understand some
>> people's reluctance to learn what is not that dissimilar to a
>> programming language. however, it's efort worth the time and energy. In
>> fact, it's probably less troublesome than learning how these fancy maths
>> editors work.
>>      
>
> It is also true that TeX and LaTeX are likely to be around long after today's
> fancy editors have been consigned to history.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blindmath mailing list
> Blindmath at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindmath_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Blindmath:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindmath_nfbnet.org/mwhapples%40aim.com
>