![]() They also offer a mathematical notebook, snip. LaTeX OCR seems to be an open source pytorch implementation. That sounds boring compared to ML-based automation. Using unicode-math, you can also search for characters by drawing (just like with detexify) using ShapeCatcher.If you are using the package unicode-math, then besides using any Unicode character list, the list of all supported symbols ( texdoc unimath-symbols) is very useful as it also lists which symbols are available in the various fonts.Another good option is to try the web-based software Detexify, which allows you to draw the symbol and tries to recognize what you’ve drawn.It can usually be easily accessed with texdoc symbols or texdoc symbols-a4 (in MiKTeX the latter only). You can look things up in the Comprehensive LaTeX symbols list. ![]() Getting LaTeX code back from screen captures photos of (formatted) equations. In which I will wait for some disruptive scholarly version of Markdown to come rescue me from LaTeX entirely. If I must innovate, it will be to discretely shuffle over However, standards lock-in being what it is, I will for now avoid arranging the deckchairs of incremental improvement on this sinking ship of legacy mess. I am indeed cognisant of the diversity and richness of buffet of failure cases I could choose from, if only in outline. What’s in a name: a guide to the many flavours of TeX.įor now I will construe LaTeX broadly, which is to say “in principle any of these LaTeX-like engines”, which is to say ”in practice any LaTeX engine which is sufficiently similar to the baseline horror to survive the submission process to ”. Here is a more pious take by Graham Douglas, Preferred name capitalisation, or community support. ![]() There are differences in various differentĮngines, formats, macro systems etc, giving usĬonTeXT and LaTeX and TeX and pdfTeX and XeTeX and LuaTeX,Īnd that they are all refreshingly unique in their choices of pain-points, Will it be robust enough to last long enough that it repays its cost? Or will they let the old system shamble on knowing it will cost their editorial board nothing to waste everyone else’s time?įor the authors: will a newer better system be good enough to justify the cost of learning it? There are also standards-lock-in problems even if someone develops a better system, will conferences and journals find it worthwhile to switch? This will keep the average quality of the pieces of this system mediocre. Side effect: grad students also have underdeveloped software development skills and will never return to remedy the engineering mistakes of their younger selves. The same labour undervaluation that keeps slave economies from developing the steam engine.Īs long as it is cheaper to solve typesetting problems with grad student labour, the system can shamble forward without anyone being incentivised to fix it for everyone else. Grad students, Robert, and the low-marginal-cost, low quality labour of grad students. How is it possible that this fairly straightforward category of software is so outdated and awful? Whether it’s writing or citation management, there are countless issues and annoyances. The tools of the trade for academics and others who write research papers are among the worst software has to offer. Now, let Robert Kosara rant about where this has evolved to: Nonetheless some context is occasionally helpful.Īn essay on the history of mathematical typography the only thing on this page However, this document is not a philological exploration it is a pragmatic guide to getting documents typeset before key deadlines pass. I am also aware that I am doing violence to the rich and storied ecosystem by failing to mention that almost everything I mention is but a macro system built upon Knuth’s OG TeX system.Įven that is a crude simplification of the complicated truth that his original system has evolved, reimplemented and mutated in complex and subtle ways. Standard disclaimer, before diving into the otaku-zone TeXonomy:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |