Publishing Woes

April 11, 2003 9:31 AM

I was thinking of writing something longer than a blog-entry. Thousand-word essays are all well and good, but they're also pretty disposeable, and I feel the need to stretch my legs.

Anyway, to do this, I must pick a format. I want an open format, naturally, but I also want to be able to publish to both PDF and HTML. I want the PDF to look professional, but I don't want the HTML to look like ass. Which leaves me in a bit of a bind.

Pros and Cons
FormatProsCons
XHTML
  • Readily convertible into other things
  • Very familiar, won't get in the way of writing
  • Limited vocabulary. No footnotes (which I write a lot of), no way to reference numbered floats (e.g. tables and figures). As such, the printable version would be substandard.
Docbook
  • Easily convertible into other things
  • Designed for this sort of task
  • I would have to learn it. I've got the O'Reilly reference, and it all looks very fiddly
  • Unfamiliarity would get in the way of writing
TeX
  • Makes very good printed output
  • While I don't know TeX itself, LyX is a very capable WYSIWYM editor that I've used in the past
  • While utilities exist to convert TeX or PDF back to HTML, I've never seen one that didn't make the HTML output look like an afterthought.

It seems that I might be best off writing Docbook using LyX, but while I trust that tool because it's generated nice TeX documents for me before, will it do the same with XML? With LyX/TeX, I was only ever worried about the output, the source was opaque to me. The Docbook route would require me to worry a lot more about the source.

Bother.

3 Comments

Use simplified Docbook, which is a stripped down docbook DTD. Very useful.

\section{Introduction}

I wrote my thesis in \LaTeX, and it worked very well for me. it's just like writing HTML source directly, except the formating tags are less bulky.

\subsection{Advantages}

It's incredibly easy to write things like footnotes and mathematical equations, and your document comes out looking \emph{very} professional. I also find that the tags fit into my thought process quite well, so they don't get in the way of my writing.

% something else i like was the ability to
% put comments directly in the source of
% my document.

It's also platform independent (just editing raw text) which was a big plus at uni with limited computing resources, but probably not so much of an issue for you.

\subsection{Disadvantages}

Well, as you mentioned, HTML output isn't the priority of TeX tool developers. But I imagine now that web people are focusing on the using the "holy trilogy" approach to document creation (content/structure/formatting) that TeX would fit in much better. (it theoretically should be a snap to convert \TeX source to HTML and then apply a stylesheet the same way a \TeX document has a document class applied.

\section{Conclusion}

Personally, i think your best bet is \LaTeX. But \smallcaps{YMMV}.

Our sysadmin swears by AsciiDoc (http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/) that I showed him. I haven't used it yet, but he generates HTML and DocBook from them and is very happy with the output.

Comments are no longer being accepted for this blog entry. If you really want to make your voice heard, you can always email me.

Previously: A good host is hard to find

Next: Prevayling Stupidity