Il 28/12/2009 18.59, Hans Hagen ha scritto:
On 28-12-2009 14:44, Manuel P. wrote:
Another "problem" is the "fluidity" of ConTeXt: it changes rapidly and
the documentation is left behind. It's good because it responds very
quickly to the real world and users needs, on the other hand it's bad
because a new user has to be "in the club" for some time to figure out
everything.
most of context (interface) is quite stable and hasn't changed in
ages; however with luatex/mkiv we can move forward and do things that
are impossible in good old tex but it's not neccessarily functionality
that you need now (after all, we have been producing pretty complex
docs with mkii and mkiv has hardly be touched the last years)
Hans
Well, I'm using context for far too short time to know this. I was just
saying what I've read around the internet, and since this is not the
case: sorry! I'm simply too inexperienced :)
I've come to realize (as I was suspecting) that my problems comes mainly
by my largely inadequate knowledge and experience with context. And this
is fine and natural. My only wrong choice was picking context for my
thesis (with a very near deadline) without knowing it sufficiently, not
my interest in it.
So the message is: context is good and powerful, but not the best choice
for this particular project since I don't know it so well. My choice and
my error. Lesson learned: for important projects, stick with whatever
you know well. Leave the experiments for free-time.
--
Manuel P.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
