Re: docutils/rST vs direct html
Alan G Isaac <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.docutils.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 1/26/2014 3:41 PM, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: > The ”lightweight” markup languages are more suitable for humans to read > and write That's certainly a key reason: pretty much anyone will be able to read it, without instruction. My original reason was that I was submitting papers to places some of which did not accept LaTeX, while others did. By using reST I could produce LaTeX or HTML as needed. (This was not quite as clean as I hoped, since the no-LaTeX outlets generally wanted Word (I kid you not). Word's import of HTML left much to be desired, and at the time the Word writer for reST had too many missing features. It was still better than converting LaTeX however! Alan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Docutils-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/docutils-users Please use "Reply All" to reply to the list.