First login?
Lost password?
 
 
 
mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

Text archives Help


Re: [TeXmacs] New mode for graphics


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Magnus Rohde <address@hidden>
  • To: address@hidden
  • Subject: Re: [TeXmacs] New mode for graphics
  • Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 11:11:24 +0200

Den 28/9-2005, kl. 18:38, Henri Lesourd wrote:

In general, I think that the really important thing is to succeed in finding your own way, not to compare yourself with others ; but as far as Xfig is concerned, of course I --must-- disagree with you : it is in fact quite realistic to say that **today**, we are already successfully competing on their very turf ! ;-)

If by "successfully competing" you mean failing miserably, then I agree with you ;-). The graphics mode, as it is now, does not even come close to any drawing program I have used since 1993.
When I mentioned Xfig and Illustrator it was just as examples for a type of program usually referred to as drawing programs and not a reference to these specific programs. And I really don't think that the graphics mode in TeXmacs will ever become a serious choice when it comes to drawing anything more than a few lines or very simple sketches (a bit like the drawing thingy in M$ Word).
I would be glad if you could prove me wrong, of course. :-)

For example, in a not too far future, it could lead us to new features for resizing non-graphical objects (like tables, for example), directly with the mouse.

I would really like to see this.

Den 28/9-2005, kl. 17:49, Alvaro Tejero Cantero wrote:

On the Illustrator point I only have to add that it is rather the opposite way
to the one you put it. It is impossible for Illustrator to compete with any free
application because it is not free.

You are correct for the very small minority of people for which software freedom matters. For the rest it is a matter of value for money, and when it comes to Illustrator/Corel Draw/FreeHand they offer real value for money, when compared to the graphics mode in TeXmacs as it is now.

Which program does a decent job of incorporating structured typesetting and a
more free placement of objects? I would be delighted to hear names...

None that I know of, but maybe TeXmacs in the future...

I also would perhaps prefer more development in the mainline of structuration,
export, styles, extremely careful typesetting, etc. But if you have been around
in this list for enough time, you should know by now that the statement above is
more than a bit unfair and impolite to Joris to say the least.

I know that Joris does put many hours into the project, and my comment wasn't on his or any other's work. What I was trying to say was that I don't think that the direction of development should be guided by the interests of the available workforce.

Den 28/9-2005, kl. 21:19, Corey Sweeney wrote:

You are proposing that more "should" be going on the "essential functionality" of TeXmacs, but i'm a little fuzzy as to what that means.  Does this refer to bugfixes? Is it a HCI thing?  For example a upgrade to a new widget library (like gtk2 or whatever) would be cool. Or perhaps "template libraries"  (like templates for legal forms or whatever comes in office packages)

I was thinking mostly of "ease of use" or HCI, and not specifically templates, but now easy they are to create. I know it has become a lot easier with the new documentation, but a function like "save as TeXmacs-style" would be cool. Also font handling, missing characters in TrueType-fonts and unicode support are areas with room for improvement. I don't care about widget libraries as it is mostly a question of looks, not functionality.



Magnus


Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of page