[Sussex] LaTeX Syntax

[Steve Dobson]

Geoff

> From: Geoff Teale
> 
> Steve Wrote:
> ============
> > If you have XEmacs installed it is part of the "Info" page...
> 
> I'll emerge it this evening and find out.  

Good luck
 
> > As for the parts of our document these are the sections that
> > LaTeX has that I would like to include (question marks for those
> > that may or may not be needed - in other words we should discuss):
> > 
> > 	?part?
> > 	?chapter?
> > 	section
> > 	subsection
> > 	subsubsection
> > 	paragraph
> 
> OK.  This is sensible.  One thought: subsection and subsubsection
> can be implied by structure and so could all just be sections.  

A point that isn't clear and should be improved upon (my mistake).
In LaTeX a paragraph is really a subsubsubsection.  Paragraphs, as
you and I think of them are just lines of text separated with a
line containing any number of white space characters.

The recursive structure is a better way of doing this.

> I have an XML Schema (XSD) file almost ready and an example 
> document that demonstrates such a structure.  I could make
> an effort to change the nomenclature to reflect LaTeX.  There
> will always be additional structures because of the nature of
> what we are trying to achieve.  

Look forward to seeing it.
 
> > There are document type within LaTeX that don't allow parts or
> > chapters.  We could just map to one of those types.  I not sure
> > I like the idea of downloading a whole book - but then again
> > some of the binary packages for Debian are getting v v big.
> 
> Hmmm.  I had not even considered chapters. We are approaching 
> a broadband age.  Fundementally a collection of chapter is just
> a special case of a sequence of super-sections.  This will make
> more sense later in the week when I show you the draft schema
> and example PvC file.

Can't wait.
  
> > LaTeX also has the following style setting:
> > 
> > 	emph (italic when in normal, normal when in italic)
> > 	normal, bold, italic
> > 	fonts (size and type)
> 
> OK, will think about these as well.  

Good, 'cos the curses based view can also have a spin of these
setting.  (I've been playing with curses over the weekend, more
when I have time to write).
 
> > Then there is the question on equations in documents.  LaTeX
> > has a lot of support for that.  My first question is can SVG
> > support equations?  If so when can of load that problem to SVG.
> 
> There is a defined XML format for equations.  It's called 
> MathML.  There are existing programs and XSLT's that convert
> MathML into SVG.  We can certainly look into it.

If it does the job then lets not re-invent the wheel (as long
as it does what we need).

> > My understanding chip just blew up - this must be a XML think 
> > that I don't understand ;-)
> 
> You wait until you see the schema!  :-P

I'll bring along a number of spare fuses.

> > Hope this helps (even if it is a bit late)
> 
> It's very useful, my exposure to LaTeX is minimal, I am, if 
> you like, a "LaTeX virgin".  Hmmm, I bet I can find lots of
> people just like me if I use that as a search term in Google!

Let's no go down that path..... :-)

Steve