TeX, publishing, futures, blathering

Few publishers use TeX, fewer still as anything other than a print engine (xmltex etc).

Duplication of effort for print and web alongside reduced importance of print will remove TeX from print pipelines, too.

Then we'll see restrictions on authors' TeX usage (to simplify conversion), i.e., enforce restricted syntax and packages.

At that point, TeX loses its main benefit as an authoring tool. Its aging niche community will continue to be that. The end.

Follow

TeX, publishing, futures, blathering

@pkra Mathematicians can be very stubborn about their tools — see https://gizmodo.com/why-mathematicians-are-hoarding-this-special-type-of-ja-1711008881

So my guess is that publishers who tried to eliminate TeX would find that instead they had eliminated their mathematical publications.

FWIW my experience is that only a few big corporate publishers of mathematics take the effort to re-set everything. Everyone else just massages authors' LaTeX to get rid of the most egregious style violations (if they even do that much).

A Mastodon instance for maths people. The kind of people who make \(\pi z^2 \times a\) jokes.

Use `\(`

and `\)`

for inline LaTeX, and `\[`

and `\]`

for display mode.

Peter Krautzberger@pkra@mathstodon.xyzTeX, publishing, futures, blathering

@11011110 that does not match my experience, having had to engage with basically every scientific publisher's production workflow while managing the MathJax Consortium.