[NTG-context] Re: Wiki - test/proposal to further clarify documentation

Am 17.04.24 um 10:36 schrieb Hans Hagen:

On 4/17/2024 8:32 AM, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:

...

...

On 16. Apr 2024, at 21:56, Peter Hopcroft via ntg-context wrote:

...

On 17/04/2024, at 7:11 AM, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:

In my poster (still WIP) I wrote: …

Excellent

No, I must admit I don’t like the first two paragraphs. The question is “what is ConTeXt,” and the answer is “we’re not LaTeX.” And why “infamous”?

I agree. It sounds the same as "we're not msword" or "we're not google docs". (In the end the only thing that latex and context have in common is that they use the tex language / ecosystem.)

In my experience, most people interested in ConTeXt know LaTeX, so it makes sense to compare. And I actually just say “LaTeX is the most known command-based typesetting system” (that’s just true) to shortcut explaining what a cbts might be. Your critique applies to JUH’s quote, though. I used “infamous” as a funny way to say “not famous, but somewhat known” (and yes, I know Latin and what the words really mean). Hraban