Koma-Script doc/source files installed with doc/source disabled

peacecop kalmer: kalmer at test.tennis24.ee
Tue Jul 26 02:33:57 CEST 2022

i just subscribed to /texhax/, too. It's also not clear to me what 
/tex-live/ actually is in comparison to LaTeX. The former is a library 
collection and the latter is a format, right? And /texhax/ is about how 
to use LaTeX and /tex-live/, right?

Your suggested Tug.org is far not as inviting as Learnlatex.org, 
especially for beginners. The design of Tug.org is like from previous 
century only without animated GIF-files and queer colors and i really 
can't find where there's a starter manual. There are many links without 
a clearly structured design. This is also a good example why i avoid 
some documentation because they just aren't written or compiled the way 
i'd like them.

Thanks for the suggestion to read a paper-book regarding to getting away 
from the computer screen! Is reading from a paper anyhow better nowadays 
as reading from the screen? In addition: i can't do permanent 
annotations if it's not my exemplar, i can't discuss with the author, 
searching functionality of a paper-book is relatively slow as it bases 
on the index at the end and that might not contain the particular string 
i want to search for, i can't copy a paragraph, i can't share the book 
itself with someone in another location, i don't see animations inside a 
paper-book, there are no links in a paper-book and if there are then i 
had to type them in, paper-books can't be updated, errata has to be 
printed separately for the next release if at all. i've only found one 
good use for a paper-book and that's also only regarding to a manual of 
chemistry and physics as it contains thousands of pages and it's not 
well-enough structured which makes me scroll and scrolling such a thick 
book is a nightmare in comparison to turning paper pages.

Yes, for PDF-files LaTeX seems to be unavoidable. Or not. I'm confused. 
Is LaTeX unavoidable or is XeTeX unavoidable as i don't use LaTeX, i use 
XeTeX or is XeTeX kind of LaTeX, too? Maybe i'm asking too many 
questions. i should really start reading the manual however i can only 
start doing it next month.

i use /bookdown/ because i haven't found a better alternative for that. 
It uses /pandoc/ and /pandoc/ uses real LaTeX and has the template ready 
to use for the five output categories (/documentclass/) LaTeX offers. 
Sometimes, i want to do something directly in LaTeX, for instance write 
equations or tell where two columns start or one column starts. 
/bookdown/ makes it possible to write once and have output either for 
web or print. Should i write directly in LaTeX using for instance 
/TeXstudio/, i have no idea how could i write R blocks inside a LaTeX 
/document/ and i can't generate a website out of my content as no web 
browser natively reads LaTeX, they only read HTML, ECMAScript and CSS 
natively. For writing web software, i use /eclipse/ as IDE. After a 
quick search, i found LaPsE 
<http://eclipse-latex.sourceforge.net/index.php?target=3> which seems to 
be promising however no idea whether it handles R. So i mainly write in 
R markdown, put some R code chunks in between and use some /TeX/ chunks 
for equations. If i'd write a web software with PHP, i'd not write 
spaghetti however that spaghetti of R markdown is pretty tasty. What it 
lacks is a JIT-compiler as there's even for Java. For larger files, i 
have to wait a lot before i see what i just produced or in order to test 
something. In that sense, LaTeX-producing is like video-producing - it 
takes time and isn't still optimized like PHP or web browsers. As for 
web, every page can be loaded separately, parts on a page can be loaded 
only if needed. As for PDF, everything will be loaded at once. And i 
only need PDF-files that i can create in LaTeX for some university 
reports and my thesis as some people like to have them printed which 
isn't so bad considering hypothesis that one day, we'll have a blackout 
and then we could still read paper-books. For posters, writing directly 
in LaTeX doesn't seem to be feasible as graphical interfaces do the work 
much more efficiently. i use /scribus/ for them which isn't a good 
software at all but there's no better FOSS in this branch. Why should i 
use LaTeX, for instance /tikz/ for creating a logo or vector graphics at 
all if there's SVG that extends XML?

For new questions that aren't directly related to /tex-live/, i'll use 
/texhax/. Regarding to Chinese characters with /bookdown/, they couldn't 
probably recommend anything if they aren't /bookdown/ experts and i 
don't want to modify /default.latex/ at least not before i really know 
what i'm doing.

On 26.07.22 02:11, Reinhard Kotucha wrote:
> On 2022-07-25 at 21:56:19 +0300, peacecop kalmer: wrote:
>   > Participating in this mailing list has already been useful.
> Sure, but for general questions about TeX and LaTeX the TeXhax mailing
> list is a more appropriate place:
>    https://www.tug.org/mailman/listinfo/texhax
> You'll certainly get more help there.
> The TeX Live mailing list is only for problems with the TeX Live
> distribution (installation problems, license issues, etc).
>   > In addition to the reasoning behind licensing, i now know the site
>   > Learnlatex.org that wasn't known to me before.
> I didn't know Learnlatex.org before either, but you'll also find a lot
> of documentation at
>    https://www.tug.org/begin.html
> There are probably a lot of books about LaTeX in your local library,
> especially if it's close to a university.  This might be quite helpful
> if you don't want to spend the rest of your life in front of a
> computer screen.
> If you want to create reasonable PDF files, learning LaTeX is
> unavoidable.  It's not as difficult as it looks at a first glance.
>   > And if i use default.latex for /bookdown/ then [...]
> I doubt that such a wrapper is helpful if you really want to learn
> LaTeX.  The input format of such tools is usually completely different
> from what's described in books about LaTeX.  In my opinion such tools
> are not good starting points for beginners at all.
>   > As for Chinese characters,
>   > [...]
> Chinese could already be typeset with LaTeX even before XeTeX and
> LuaTeX were invented.
> If you are interested in a solution, start a new thread on TeXhax, not
> here (see link above).  Prepare a minimal .tex file which can be fed
> to xelatex and lualatex and demonstrates the problem.
> Regards,
>    Reinhard
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Reinhard Kotucha                            Phone: +49-511-3373112
> Marschnerstr. 25
> D-30167 Hannovermailto:reinhard.kotucha at gmx.de
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/attachments/20220726/78111148/attachment.html>

More information about the tex-live mailing list.