On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
Even if math is "typical" for TeX, it's not typical for ConTeXt.
I think the typical university user is content with LaTeX. ConTeXt is for those who like to design their own layout.
And that's, unfortunately, a poor view to take. I would love to use ConTeXt for more of my academic writing, as it makes a lot of tasks much easier, not just layout and design. Unfortunately, it's inability to play like LaTeX when it comes to even such basic things as footnotes, means that I have to constantly turn back to LaTeX whenever I need to write something for work or school.
Again, I don't think that bibliographies are basic. But I'm no scientific user.
And for those of us who are, bibliographies are *crucial* and should be considered a basic part of any tpesetting program that wants to be taken seriously. And while m-bib is usually sufficient, it too has enough quirks that it's just not worth the time to even bother if you want to submit a paper that has a special format requirement for the bibliographies. William D. Neumann --- "Well I could be a genius, if I just put my mind to it. And I...I could do anything, if only I could get 'round to it. Oh we were brought up on the space-race, now they expect you to clean toilets. When you've seen how big the world is, how can you make do with this? If you want me, I'll be sleeping in - sleeping in throughout these glory days." -- Jarvis Cocker Think of XML as Lisp for COBOL programmers. -- Tony-A (some guy on /.)