mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[Frank <address@hidden>]

Hello all,

Some of these nests are unavoidable. For example, in TeXmacs, there are 
different syntactical meaning of mathematical symbols. In LaTeX, one writes, 
say, $a\dot b$, while in TeXmacs, sometimes one needs to specify that this 
dot is a multiplication-like operation.

On the other hand, if one is ready to sacrifice these finer information, then 
it seems possible to introduce several abbreviations to simplify some nests. 
Note that in LaTeX, \begin{document} is also a kind of nest.

The crucial question is whether it is worthwhile for the developers of TeXmacs to 
implement such. I don't think that this is a crucial obstruction of TeXmacs. I think 
that people more-or-less tend to judge that everybody *should use LaTeX*, no matter how 
TeXmacs "improves" its usability for text editors.

Best wishes,
Frank

On 7/12/21, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> Yes.  The difficulty stems mainly from the deeply nested or complex data 
> structures in the source,
> in ways similar to what I see with xml.