[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] Mathematics and DocBook
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 12:00:45PM -0600, Kevin S. Van Horn wrote: > 2. Graphic math. This has all the disadvantages of (1) except for > lack of nice typesetting, with the added disadvantages that one > needs to write an additional, separate file for every tiny bit of > math, and the math is completely unreadable (not even in the same > file) when editing the source XML file. This is the approach I have used, though admittedly it was for a grand total of two displayed equations in a 165 page book. I used LaTeX to typeset the equations, and produced tightly bounded EPS and PNG images. I then specified two different imageobjects, EPS for print output and PNG for HTML and HTML Help. In my situation, the problem with using any form of inline TeX is that, AFAICS, you need to be using a TeX-based backend to generate the PS or PDF from the XSL-FO. Personally, I prefer XEP as it is a much more complete implementation of the FO spec. The graphic math approach works, but it does not scale for the reasons you describe. I wonder whether it could be automated. An XSL stylesheet could extract the inline TeX, but I presume another pass would be required to convert that to individual small files. You would also need to replace the inline code itself with a reference to the files which will be eventually created as images---so we're already up to two passes over the source before we even start converting to the output format. And, of course, none of this removes the verbosity of it all that you describe, though it would be a big improvement over doing it all by hand. -- Paul. mailto:paulh@logicsquad.net mailto:phoadley@maths.adelaide.edu.au
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]