Re: The Problems of TeX

Jim Diamond <Jim.Diamond@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The choice of distribution is not remotely free but depends on how much
the user already knows about TeX and friends. Some TeX systems need
very expert care for installation, others do not.

Even MacTeX that I got needed a *LOT* of work on my part before I could
get it working usefully. Documentation is poor, help is hard to come
by.

I don't see that many people are in a position to install a TeX
installation from scratch these days in any case - every one that I've
looked at has needed a stone-cold TeX+computer expert to set up.

I used to be a tetex user, until TE stopped maintaining it. I found
it straightforward to install texlive 2007 on a Linux system. It was
certainly more effort than installing the tetex packages for my
distribution of choice (Slackware), but it wasn't too hard. Note that
I had never done any non-trivial configuration of TeX distributions
before, so I didn't fall into the "tex installation/configuration
wizard" category. And I still don't.

<shrug> But you do fall into the category of `Unix expert', at a guess?

I'm not a TeX installation/configuration wizard and never have been -
but I could install and configure OzTeX and CMacTeX without bother (or
without much bother in the case of CMacTeX, which is closer to the Unix
world than OzTeX0.

I could not do the same with MacTeX - it was impossible to do without
lots of expert assistance, much of it very grudgingly given because the
experts clearly didn't want me to learn how to subvert their ideas for
what I should be doing...

(GW? What do those letters mean? I have no idea)

So: I would say that the selection and installation of the TeX system
depends on having a TeX expert who's also an expert in the host computer
system to hand. The normal user cannot exercise a choice in this area.
Maybe that is the case in the MacOS world, I dunno. But honestly I
don't think it is for Linux.

If you're a Unix expert (and it sounds like you are), then you'll have
no trouble.

<snip>

Most people /can't/ learn to use Emacs, AUCTeX, and so on -
I've tried to learn how to use Emacs+AUCTeX from the supplied
documentation, and I have failed. Emacs documentation is, on its own,
impossible for a normal person to get anywhere with as far as I can
tell. This is the big problem with a lot of Unix-side software:
documentation that is designed to exclude.
I think that is harsh to the point of inaccuracy.

Yes, it's inaccurate, but only because I'm being far too polite and
gentle.

The *raw* opinion I have on the subject of `typical Unix-style
documentation' is - umm, different. You've got the toned-down, filtered
opinion - my public lie on the subject.

Look, it's perfectly obvious that Unix documentation is written on the
basis of `If you don't understand this stuff, you shouldn't be fiddling
with it'. It's also obvious that Unix documentation is mostly written
by heavy, heavy hackers who have no idea how to communicate with normal
human beings, no idea what learning requirements normal human beings
have, no idea how to assess the quality of their documentation, and
generally no interest at all in making their documentation *useful*.

Clearly quite a lot of Unix documentation is written with great care and
attention to detail - so the authors do care about *something*, but it's
not `making the documentation useful for others', whatever they're
playing at.

I know it's not *all* like that - but the above rant gives the general
flavour of the vast majority of Unix documentation that I've met.

I would say that a
lot of Unix docs are designed to be terse and not beginner-friendly.
(And yes, I agree that is a problem.) But I seriously doubt that many
(or any) documentation writers actually design their docs to exclude
people.

<puzzled> But `terse and not beginner friendly' is equivalent to
`designed to exclude'.

You're not making any sense here, I'm afraid.

I believe they just don't make the effort to make the
documentation more inclusive.

The documentation is written so that only existing Unix experts who
already `know it all' (more or less) can use it.

That's a policy which excludes almost everything - and it's deliberate.

(Yeah, I've looked at the AUCTeX docs, and I must admit I didn't see a
whole lot there for plain TeX users, notwithstanding the advertising
that says it is useful for plain TeX. Intentional exclusion for plain
TeX users? I doubt it, just not a major interest for people
contributing to AUCTeX. Or maybe I didn't spend enough time looking.)

I've looked at the AUCTeX docs. They're one reason I've never tried to
use Emacs seriously in recent years. I've only ever been able to learn
how to use a specific mode in Emacs by following instructions from a
human being - Emacs `help' has never helped me learn how to use the
features of a mode (the standard Unix `documentation written for experts
only' problem again).

When I lost access to a live-in Unix sysadmin (long time ago, when a
student), that was `it' for me and Emacs, really. Its documentation
makes it very hard for someone to learn to use who doesn't have a human
expert to hand.

I've never been able to learn anything about `Unix-related issues' from
the documentation alone - always, always, always in the case of
Unix-related anything, I need to ask questions of people because Unix
documentation is - pretty much universally - *meant* to be
incomprehensible to non-initiates. I stand by my claim that is quite
deliberate.

Rowland.

--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Problems of TeX
    ... it straightforward to install texlive 2007 on a Linux system. ... I had never done any non-trivial configuration of TeX distributions ... But you do fall into the category of `Unix expert', ... Emacs documentation is, on its own, ...
    (comp.text.tex)
  • Re: The Problems of TeX
    ... I had never done any non-trivial configuration of TeX distributions ... But you do fall into the category of `Unix expert', ... because you have learnt how to use the documentation. ...
    (comp.text.tex)
  • Re: The Problems of TeX
    ... I had never done any non-trivial configuration of TeX distributions ... But you do fall into the category of `Unix expert', ... because you have learnt how to use the documentation. ... neophytes have succeeded in installing and then productively using ...
    (comp.text.tex)
  • Re: The Problems of TeX
    ... I had never done any non-trivial configuration of TeX distributions ... But you do fall into the category of `Unix expert', ... because you have learnt how to use the documentation. ... Linux is an unstable mess that you can't learn about without inhabiting ...
    (comp.text.tex)
  • Re: The Problems of TeX
    ... MacOS X TeX mailing list? ... MacTeX'. ... software, not documentation. ... 'cause he participates on mailings lists where people discuss their ...
    (comp.text.tex)