Learning Tex?

GERGE · 2012-02-14 10:58:45

I have been slowly making my way toward a career in academics, and heard that this tex system could help a great deal. My field was economics and now it is law, and as far as I've seen tex is mostly used in mathematics and such.

Would I benefit from it? If so, where should I start learning? I also checked editors, I need one with a spellcheck, English not being my first language (I mostly write in English).

Even if I decide to go and become an attorney, I will be working with long and complex documents. As why I am asking this here, I know no one who uses it at the university or the family law firm. Almost all lawyers here, whether they are writing a textbook, a long article or preparing for a lawsuit, either use MS Word or old pen&paper.

Last edited by GERGE (2012-02-14 11:11:22)

FreeTheBee · 2012-02-14 11:15:57

TeX takes a little getting used to, but for me it definitely pays of using it. I'm a chemist but don't write mathematically heavy documents, but still I think it is much more convenient than using a word processor. I mainly like the way it forces me to write structured documents and that it takes care of citations and crossreferencing and such. And of course the output looks great.

For starters I would recommend skimming through 'the not so short introduction to LaTeX', it gives quite a good overview. There are many other introduction tutorials, but this is the one I used when I got started.

For editors you could check kile, texmaker, or texworks. Personally I use Vim with the vim-latex plugin. Emacs also has a really nice teX plugin.

GordonGR · 2012-02-14 11:50:36

I love *TeX, but then again I'm a mathematician. Anyway, you can try and see how it goes. The Internet is packed with free books (for example this). Also, if you plan on using Turkish (with all the special characters), you'll probably be better of with Xe(La)TeX, which is a flavour supporting UTF8 out of the box with preinstalled TTFs and OTFs (as opposed to the Type1 fonts of classic (La)TeX). Take a look, for example, here.

As for editors, I use Kile, but in my old computer I just used gEdit with its latex plugin (available, I believe, in the AUR).

Last edited by GordonGR (2012-02-14 11:52:00)

Trilby · 2012-02-14 12:47:42

I keep trying tex, and I just don't get it.

It's not that I don't understand how to use it, I just can find any benefits for the type of writing I do. Just now I thought, what the heck, I'll try it again. I followed the not so short introduction above and made the first test document (all of four lines long ... with one line of output). I installed over 1/3GB of tex-stuff, and - following the tutorial - I tried to create my pdf. I know two do this I must go through a few steps (tex -> dvi -> ps -> pdf), each of which can create a few different output files. The first step gave me an error from that test document. Now I had four separate files from just that first step, which all together did not help make one pdf with one line of text!

I've also noted in the past that 'compiling' tex documents can take a bit of time, the tutorial notes this too. It also notes that while it is easy to create a document, creating a new layout or format can be very difficult.

Now, I contrast this to my current method of document creation: vim+html + html2pdf converter -> beautiful, simple, pdfs. As an academic creating many documents, I've found this method much, much simpler. I can similarly focus on content, I don't need bloated office programs (which do not even approach tex's 1/3 - 1/2 Gig!). I can also create new formats or layouts with just a dozen lines of CSS.

This is not at all to say that I don't see value in tex. For book length publications, documents with many equations, and likely non-english character sets, it is likely the best way to go. But for my circumstances it was a bit like going quail hunting with a bazooka: way to much firepower for the job which leaves me with a horrible mess and nothing to show for it.

In short, while tex certainly has it's place, that place is as *one* alternative to 'office' programs, not as the *only* alternative.

FreeTheBee · 2012-02-14 13:40:50

Trilby wrote:

...
I tried to create my pdf. I know two do this I must go through a few steps (tex -> dvi -> ps -> pdf), each of which can create a few different output files
...
It also notes that while it is easy to create a document, creating a new layout or format can be very difficult
...

You can also generate pdf directly, using pdflatex or xelatex. Sometimes this is not just simpler, but also gives better output, for example when using the microtype package.

Changing the layout of a document can be a pain indeed, but with memoir or KOMA a lot of things can be changed without too much effort. When writing papers I don't care too much, some publishers (e.g. elsevier) have their own documentclass which makes creating submission ready files fairly trivial.

@GERGE One significant problem could be collaboration. When working in a non TeX/tech working environment, it could be a pain having to work together on documents. Non TeX people tend to have problems working on the source file, since it is rather different from using a word processor.

GERGE · 2012-02-14 15:04:23

Collaboration is not a problem. I am going to be using TeX for my own work.

Anyway, I've started to play with it. I migrated a simple 5-page essay to TeX using an editor called Gummi (real-time preview helped immeasurably), using TeX would make my work much easier. This is great!

I have to finish 3 pages till tomorrow, Creating a document in Gummi (without the actual content; only title, formating and such) took as much time as it would have in LibreOffice (I might be a little exaggerating here), and that is together with learning how to do it. Then I noticed bibliography features. Well, I cannot remember when was the last time something in computing made me this excited. This should be taught in every university. I remember when they taught us different styles and how to use them with MS Word, they should have taught TeX too back then.

sevmpe · 2012-02-14 15:45:41

GERGE wrote:

Creating a document in Gummi (without the actual content; only title, formating and such) took as much time as it would have in LibreOffice (I might be a little exaggerating here), and that is together with learning how to do it.

And now, you have the skeleton for your documents so even if you spent more time setting up for the first time, for the next document the only thing that need changing is the actual contents. For the bibliography, there are certainly many programs that allow you to manage .bib bibliographic databases. Jabref is a classic, for example.

@Trilby Why don't you try LyX?

whitie · 2012-02-14 19:26:29

Hi GERGE,
for my documents I use reStructuredText. It is easy to write and to read (the source), available from [extra] and can be translated to HTML, LaTex (then PDF) and other formats. The package is called docutils. I use this for documents with less than 10 pages.
For larger things I use Sphinx. It is an extension for docutils, with automatic table of contents, index an more. Sphinx is available from [community].

I used LaTex a long time, but for my documents the two above are quiet good and very simple (compared to Tex). The only pain are tables, but in LaTex too.

Whitie

Edit: Vim has very good support for reStructuredText.

Last edited by whitie (2012-02-14 19:29:37)

Trilby · 2012-02-14 19:40:23

Lyx? Isn't that just a gui editor for tex files? If I wanted to write tex files I'd use vim.

bernarcher · 2012-02-14 21:45:38

LyX is a gui editor for LaTeX based texts. But it uses its own file format. To obtain tex files the contents have to be exported.

LyX is good for fairly simple tasks for beginners and/or to maintain longer texts with the feeling of a traditional WYSIWYG-like document processor. (Although it is no real WYSIWYG of course.)

Once you are more proficient with LaTeX you most likely will switch to some direct tex file editing with tools like Vim, Emacs, etc.

Trilby · 2012-02-15 02:59:13

I think I like using WYSIWYG editors about as much as I like trying to pronounce their abbereviation (I don't).

I hope my points didn't come across too strongly. I didn't mean to criticize Latex (criticize in the mean sense anyhow) - I only meant to highlight why it did not fit my needs or desires and highlight what I see as a great alternative.

Last edited by Trilby (2012-02-15 02:59:33)

ewaller · 2012-02-15 04:00:07

I've come to love LaTex. I use it at work to create requirements documents, whitepapers, test plans, etc... The thing I truly love is being able to create macros that can create files on the fly. Then, being able to include the output of scripts (Python in my case) that perform custom operations on the files crated by the macros. These I use to create compliance matrices, acronym lists, todo lists, etc...

TeX itself is a bit bare knuckled for my needs. The nice part is that it is right there under the surface if you need it.

To make things really nice, write a Makefile to assemble your documents:

all:	pdf dvi

pdf:	
	latexmk -pdflatex='pdflatex -enable-write18 %O %S' audio -pdf 

dvi:	
	latexmk -pdflatex='latex -enable-write18 %O %S' audio 

clean:
	rm -rf *.aux
	rm -rf */*.aux
	rm -rf *.bbl
	rm -rf */*.bbl
	rm -rf tmp/*
	rm -rf *.blg
	rm -rf *.toc
	rm -rf *.log
	rm -rf *.out
	rm -rf *.fdb_latexmk
	rm -rf src/*converted-to.pdf

Foucault · 2012-02-16 19:16:17

Trilby wrote:

I think I like using WYSIWYG editors about as much as I like trying to pronounce their abbereviation (I don't).

LyX is NOT a WYSIWYG editor. It's a thin and easy to use layer on top of TeX. From the LyX homepage:

LyX Homepage wrote:

LyX is a document processor that encourages an approach to writing based on the structure of your documents (WYSIWYM) and not simply their appearance (WYSIWYG).
LyX combines the power and flexibility of TeX/LaTeX with the ease of use of a graphical interface. This results in world-class support for creation of mathematical content (via a fully integrated equation editor) and structured documents like academic articles, theses, and books. In addition, staples of scientific authoring such as reference list and index creation come standard. But you can also use LyX to create a letter or a novel or a theatre play or film script. A broad array of ready, well-designed document layouts are built in.

LyX uses the very same document classes that LaTeX uses but adds an easy to use interface on top of them. You will definitely benefit from already knowing TeX since one way or another one must write some TeX code to fine tune the results but it's a nice way to start IMO.

Ease of use is not an argument to use TeX. Although I'm quite accustomed to writing TeX markup I understand that the learning curve is indeed quite steep. But in the end the quality of the output is superb. When you are used to documents produced by TeX you can't go back. It's not only about mathematics. If one values quality typesetting over ease of use then TeX is the way to go.

/dev/zero · 2012-02-16 19:27:36

The screenshot on the Lyx homepage looks fairly WYSIWYG to me.

I'm not sure I understand Trilby's aversion to (La)TeX, but I sympathise with his insistence that the only way to do these things is with vim (or emacs if you're that kind of person).

GERGE · 2012-02-16 19:49:11

I finished a 4 page homework today. As I learn how to use it, it gets better and better. With GordonGR's suggestion, I used XeTex and I can say that I never had that much control over fonts before. I also didn't find it hard at all. It is easy, at least for the work I did for now. I am trying to figure out how to use titlesec right now, till I got good control over it sectsty works good enough.

Now, a problem: As I said, my faculty doesn't seem to use it, so I took a portable one with me to finish that 4-page. Something called LyTeX. But I couldn't use otf fonts I had with me so I had to change all the fonts I used. How could I use my own otf fonts in a portable system with Windows (maybe there is a simple answer, I only learned where Windows puts its font today and that I couldn't access it. No ~/fonts folder )? I also can't get administrative rights without a long process which would probably only works in theory.

Last edited by GERGE (2012-02-16 20:26:25)

FreeTheBee · 2012-02-16 20:24:58

When I was still on windows I used MiKTeX as my TeX distribution. It comes in a portable version as well. I have never used it myself, but it might be worth checking out.

http://miktex.org/portable/about

mike_r · 2012-02-16 22:34:51

/dev/zero wrote:

The screenshot on the Lyx homepage looks fairly WYSIWYG to me.

You're going to judge it based on a single screenshot? The screenshot shows that LyX has a GUI, not how it actually operates. LyX is "What you see is what you mean", or perhaps "What you see is a representation of what you are going to get". The text on the screen approximates a page, but all the LaTeX markup rules are obeyed.

For example, if you expand the GUI horizontally, the text is reflowed to fill the GUI; however, there is absolutely no change on the printed page. All the GUI is telling you is that there is a paragraph of text and perhaps some hints about what the LaTeX engine might do with that paragraph (indenting, ragged right, etc.). LyX provides a convenient shortcut for all the \begin{}-\end{} environments and markup commands that define what goes into that paragraph. Same goes for mathmatical formulas, lists, figures, etc.

LyX tries to give you a decent preview so you have some idea what to expect, but the final output is all the TeX/LaTeX magic. Definitely not WYSIWYG!

Warning: I used to write documentation for LyX before my kids took over my life ...

Mike

/dev/zero · 2012-02-16 22:55:53

Well, you're allowed to be a LyX fanboy, and maybe for those of us who haven't used it, the judgement that it looks "WYSIWYGish" is a bit off. Well, substitute in the word GUI for WYSIWYG, then.

I don't want to put words in Trilby's mouth, but it seems to me like anyone jumping up and down about how "LyX isn't really WYSIWYG!" is just plain missing the point. LyX is not the kind of environment that appeals to many of us who like working in a terminal, with vim or emacs as our editor of choice.

mike_r · 2012-02-17 00:20:19

I understand LyX isn't for everyone. To be honest, I write in straight LaTeX/emacs almost all the time because I find it easier for the type of writing I usually do now. (A report with hundreds of figures just isn't practical with a GUI.) I'm just trying to be clear that LyX takes an intermediate approach that might be appropriate for some who are intimidated by the LaTeX command set, but would still like the disciplined approach of a markup language and the beautiful output of TeX. Cheers!

Mike

jaco · 2012-02-17 01:13:40

I'm agree with Whitie : using ReStructuredText as a unique source format and sphinx to produce final documents is a good catch : rst is a simplistic format and creating html/LaTex/pdf with docutils/sphinx is really simple.

But, to learn LaTeX and it's customisation tweaks (useful to adapt sphinx transformations to your own needs), it's better to spend some times learning raw LaTeX.

Trilby · 2012-02-17 01:29:55

Hopefully to clarify: it seems my comments were taken more strongly than they were intended. /Dev/Zero is pretty much right about my reaction to Lyx - I'm sorry I judged to quickly and assumed it was WYSIWYG, but none-the-less my reluctance to take up tex had nothing to do with the interface I'd use to create the files. So highlighting a shiny new (or different) interface was not really a great sales pitch.

I thought I was clear that it was the large amount of software that needed to be installed and the (seemingly) complex process of getting that latex code made into a pdf. I was corrected on the complexity of the latex-to-pdf process, and I will check it out again - though I'm still suspicious about the time it takes to 'compile' latex to a pdf ... I'll check that out this weekend. My former concern still remains. I have no aversion whatsoever to installing a good sized package if I get something for it. But for my use I have not seen an advantage of the large latex package over a much smaller and faster html-to-pdf converters.

For me it's a simple comparison of small, fast, does everything I want versus big, potentially slower, and does a lot of stuff I don't need. Kinda' a no brainer for me. It's a similar logic that led me to arch. Now for those who do have use for all the other wonderful things latex can do I see how it would be a no-brainer in the other direction - so I have no aversion to the tool, it's just not the right tool for my purposes.

EDIT: I will be trying out pdflatex and/or xelatex over the weekend. I'm open to having my mind changed - the points I've raised are only based on my current mileage, and as they say, yours may vary.

Last edited by Trilby (2012-02-17 01:32:23)

skottish · 2012-02-17 02:33:21

This is for the memoir class, but it also happens to be a massive wellspring of information on not only TeX, but for typography in general. It's a very, very useful document:

http://www.tex.ac.uk/CTAN/macros/latex/ … memman.pdf

Last edited by skottish (2012-02-17 02:34:06)

cfr · 2012-02-17 03:56:47

I would be reluctant to recommend TeX to somebody in my own discipline even though it is what I use just because of problems with collaboration, submission etc. I've had to get hard copy in for job applications because a university wouldn't accept anything but Word; I've begged neighbours to let me correct a latex -> odt -> word conversion because I know that checking it in Open/LibreOffice won't guarantee it displays correctly for a journal editor and the journal will accept only Word. Every form I fill in, Word. Teaching stuff often has to be converted to Word. BibTeX is fantastic - until you have to generate Word from it because you are not allowed to use PDF because the system will only take Word...

TeX is fantastic. The rest of the world is the problem.

FreeTheBee · 2012-02-17 07:19:12

Trilby wrote:

though I'm still suspicious about the time it takes to 'compile' latex to a pdf ...

For me compiling usually takes one to a few seconds (24p doc with figures and references on a 6yr old 3GHz xeon), I noticed texlive is significantly faster than miktex. I always found this a bit strange though, since afaik they use the same binaries. It could be a windows vs linux thing as well, since I switched to texlive when I started using linux.
Manually compiling can be a bit of a pain due to the way TeX handles references and such. On the first compilation it creates an auxilliary file with info on the references and labels that TeX came across. The second compilation uses the info from the aux file to put in the references. If page for example page numbers, changed during this run, a third compilation will be necessary. When using bibtex I usually need 3 texs and one bibtex to get the final document. Many TeX editors have functionality to take care of this automatically, but it will still increase the total compilation time of course.

/dev/zero · 2012-02-17 10:18:50

FreeTheBee wrote:

Manually compiling can be a bit of a pain due to the way TeX handles references and such. On the first compilation it creates an auxilliary file with info on the references and labels that TeX came across. The second compilation uses the info from the aux file to put in the references. If page for example page numbers, changed during this run, a third compilation will be necessary. When using bibtex I usually need 3 texs and one bibtex to get the final document.

Dude. Makefile that shit.

Arch Linux

#1 2012-02-14 10:58:45

Learning Tex?

#2 2012-02-14 11:15:57

Re: Learning Tex?

#3 2012-02-14 11:50:36

Re: Learning Tex?

#4 2012-02-14 12:47:42

Re: Learning Tex?

#5 2012-02-14 13:40:50

Re: Learning Tex?

#6 2012-02-14 15:04:23

Re: Learning Tex?

#7 2012-02-14 15:45:41

Re: Learning Tex?

#8 2012-02-14 19:26:29

Re: Learning Tex?

#9 2012-02-14 19:40:23

Re: Learning Tex?

#10 2012-02-14 21:45:38

Re: Learning Tex?

#11 2012-02-15 02:59:13

Re: Learning Tex?

#12 2012-02-15 04:00:07

Re: Learning Tex?

#13 2012-02-16 19:16:17

Re: Learning Tex?

#14 2012-02-16 19:27:36

Re: Learning Tex?

#15 2012-02-16 19:49:11

Re: Learning Tex?

#16 2012-02-16 20:24:58

Re: Learning Tex?

#17 2012-02-16 22:34:51

Re: Learning Tex?

#18 2012-02-16 22:55:53

Re: Learning Tex?

#19 2012-02-17 00:20:19

Re: Learning Tex?

#20 2012-02-17 01:13:40

Re: Learning Tex?

#21 2012-02-17 01:29:55

Re: Learning Tex?

#22 2012-02-17 02:33:21

Re: Learning Tex?

#23 2012-02-17 03:56:47

Re: Learning Tex?

#24 2012-02-17 07:19:12

Re: Learning Tex?

#25 2012-02-17 10:18:50

Re: Learning Tex?

Board footer