On Sat, 2003-03-22 at 11:32, Nikolaos I. Ioakimidis wrote:
>
> Naturally, I agree too, it's ugly and not editable. On the contrary, in
> Mathematica and Maple it's at least beautiful; I am not sure about
> editable, I doubt.
>
> But now, with Maxima I mean, I am very pleased to cut the output
> (both the direct output and the related tex command output too I
> mean) and paste it directly in my LaTeX TeX file and, next, work
> with it, having in front of me, in the tex file, both the ugly (but
> readable,
> 2D) Maxima mathematical output followed by the related TeX output
> (available also there, one after the other) and when ready with my
> text cut the direct Maxima output, leave just the TeX Maxima output
> I wish to be there and process my TeX file with LaTeX. This has
> been impossible for me with Mathematica.
I am afraid several people on the list have misconstrued this
discussion. Maxima has the ability to convert its internal mathematical
expressions into several forms, including the ascii-art 2D display and
tex output. Several projects have used the tex output capability to
provide typeset output. This approach has many problems, not the least
of which being the inability to display large expressions in a
reasonable way.
Nobody is suggesting that we somehow delete the tex output function.
What we want is the ability to graphically display large expressions
without incurring an unreasonable speed penalty. Furthermore, it would
be very helpful if subexpressions were mouse-selectable. The question is
whether the solution to this problem will utilize TeX itself. I don't
think so, but that doesn't mean that we will remove any of the
tex-related functionality we already have.
--Jim
--
James Amundson <amundson@fnal.gov>