-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Giuseppe Bilotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I agree with you. Productive editing of XML document requires
> specialized editors, and I still haven't found an (open source)
> one that was up to the task. Vex is quite promising, in this
> regard.
It
On Dec 9, 2003, at 5:39 PM, Christopher G D Tipper wrote:
On Dec 8, 2003, at 2:33 PM, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
Am Montag, 08.12.03, um 18:20 Uhr (Europe/Zurich) schrieb Bob
Kerstetter:
ConTeXt is very attractive because of its detailed control, layers,
colors, few or no packages(!), magical
Wednesday, December 10, 2003 Christopher G D Tipper wrote:
> This is probably taboo, but surely the smart thing to do
> is start from Word, generate some XML with macros, and
> produce some HTML with stylesheets, some PDF with ConTeXt.
> BTW you can generate some simple Context with VB macros and
> On Dec 8, 2003, at 2:33 PM, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
>
> > Am Montag, 08.12.03, um 18:20 Uhr (Europe/Zurich) schrieb Bob
> > Kerstetter:
> >> ConTeXt is very attractive because of its detailed control, layers,
> >> colors, few or no packages(!), magical developers, and on and on.
> >> I
At 23:06 08/12/2003, Giuseppe Bilotta wrote:
Monday, December 8, 2003 Bob Kerstetter wrote:
> I know XML source should work, but at least for me, creating XML source
> is unproductive. I work with a text editor and find writing this:
> ``Hello world,'' says HAL.
> much more productive than writi
Monday, December 8, 2003 Bob Kerstetter wrote:
> I know XML source should work, but at least for me, creating XML source
> is unproductive. I work with a text editor and find writing this:
> ``Hello world,'' says HAL.
> much more productive than writing this:
> “Hello world”, says HAL.
> Mayb
On Dec 8, 2003, at 2:33 PM, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
Am Montag, 08.12.03, um 18:20 Uhr (Europe/Zurich) schrieb Bob
Kerstetter:
ConTeXt is very attractive because of its detailed control, layers,
colors, few or no packages(!), magical developers, and on and on.
It can obvious produce PDF.
On Dec 8, 2003, at 12:55 PM, Peter Münster wrote:
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Bob Kerstetter wrote:
It can obvious produce PDF. Can it also produce HTML and Word from the
same document?
Hello,
I like TeX4ht for LaTeX. It would be great, if TeX4ht and ConTeXt work
together. It seems, that it works well wi
Am Montag, 08.12.03, um 18:20 Uhr (Europe/Zurich) schrieb Bob
Kerstetter:
ConTeXt is very attractive because of its detailed control, layers,
colors, few or no packages(!), magical developers, and on and on.
It can obvious produce PDF. Can it also produce HTML and Word from the
same documen
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Bob Kerstetter wrote:
> It can obvious produce PDF. Can it also produce HTML and Word from the
> same document?
Hello,
I like TeX4ht for LaTeX. It would be great, if TeX4ht and ConTeXt work
together. It seems, that it works well with plain-TeX, so why not with
ConTeXt?
Peter
Hello ConTeXt Users,
I have been using LaTeX for 15 months or so. From one source document I
am able to produce:
1. PDF
2. HTML
3. Word (via HTML conversion)
ConTeXt is very attractive because of its detailed control, layers,
colors, few or no packages(!), magical developers, and on and on.
11 matches
Mail list logo