From: Paul Rudin <paul-sqPYmOVXOov10XsdtD+oqA@public.gmane.org>
To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:19:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86sifvwuky.fsf@rudin.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: D0C44A59.21E88%Elwood151@web.de
M <Elwood151-S0/GAf8tV78@public.gmane.org> writes:
>> Von: Paul Rudin <paul-sqPYmOVXOov10XsdtD+oqA@public.gmane.org>
>>
>> No mention of emacs... who uses anything else to prepare their LaTeX?
>>
> Did you forget the " ;-)" or are you serious?
I wasn't being entirely serious; but I was alluding to a serious
point. You can't really compare a command line typesetting system alone
with a word processor. To make a proper comparison you'd have to look at
the complete toolchain.
For example, some of the errors are typos. Word, of course, has a speil
chucker. Did the LaTeX users use an editor that highlights such errors?
But as others have pointed out the more fundamental problem with the
study is that it tries to assess secretarial or copy-editing skills
rather than authoring skills.
(I haven't actually read the paper, just what has been said in this
thread.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-31 18:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-26 22:47 Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word Ken Mankoff
2014-12-26 23:36 ` Thomas S. Dye
2014-12-27 2:21 ` briangpowell .
2014-12-27 14:36 ` Eric S Fraga
2014-12-27 3:26 ` Christopher W. Ryan
2014-12-28 22:45 ` Bob Newell
2014-12-27 4:27 ` Nick Dokos
2014-12-27 9:06 ` Peter Neilson
2014-12-27 14:38 ` Eric S Fraga
2014-12-27 9:48 ` Achim Gratz
2014-12-27 10:05 ` Paul Rudin
2014-12-27 10:36 ` M
2014-12-27 11:36 ` Fabrice Popineau
2014-12-28 22:43 ` Pascal Fleury
2014-12-31 18:19 ` Paul Rudin [this message]
2014-12-27 13:37 ` Daniele Pizzolli
2014-12-28 21:40 ` Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word ---LOOK AT THE DATA! Christophe Pouzat
2014-12-29 19:47 ` Thomas S. Dye
2014-12-31 16:59 ` Colin Baxter
2015-01-04 20:38 ` Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word John Kitchin
2015-01-04 21:15 ` Andreas Leha
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=86sifvwuky.fsf@rudin.co.uk \
--to=paul-sqpymovxoov10xsdtd+oqa@public.gmane.org \
--cc=emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).