A detailed description of the structure in the proximity of the cursor is provided in the footer of the editor window, finely selectable with left-right arrow presses. In the TeXmacs editor structure and appearance of the document are represented at the same time the structure is made evident to the user by surrounding logical units of the document in nested focus frames carrying color cues that are displayed according to the movement of the cursor. Along with the Cygwin version, a native port is available for Microsoft Windows. TeXmacs currently runs on most Unix-based architectures including Linux, FreeBSD, Cygwin, Haiku and macOS. An implementation of spreadsheets is present starting from version 1.99.12 spreadsheets in TeXmacs can take advantage of plugins (for example Python or Maxima) to compute cell values. It also features a presentation mode and a small technical drawing editor and there are plans to evolve towards a complete scientific office suite with spreadsheet capabilities. TeXmacs also supports a Scheme extension language called Guile for customizing the program and writing extensions. It can be used as a front-end to a number of computer algebra systems such as Maxima, FriCAS and SageMath, and can in turn integrate some of their output into its typesetting. TeXmacs can handle mathematical formulas, tables, images, cross-references and citations.
AQUAMACS RED CURSOR PDF
There is a converter for MathML as well, and TeXmacs can output PDF and PostScript for printing. LaTeX also can be imported (to some extent), and both import from HTML, Scheme, "Verbatim", and XML and export to them is provided the HTML export is stylable with CSS (since version 1.99.14). TeXmacs is not a front-end to LaTeX but TeXmacs documents can be converted to either TeX or LaTeX. The goal of TeXmacs is to provide a WYSIWYG editor that nevertheless makes it possible to write correctly structured documents with aesthetically pleasing typesetting results. Like in many WYSIWYG editors (such as Microsoft Word), authors manipulate a document on screen which should print to a similar-looking paper copy. A cyan focus frame surrounds the innermost environment (a formula environment) the cursor is in, while the subtle gray box surrounds another active tag (the theorem environment). On another side of the editing and document preparation world, a program for visual interaction with structured texts written in LaTeX is LyX, which does not aim at WYSIWYG editing but at visual representation of the structure ( WYSIWYM).Ī screenshot showing mathematical formulas and italic font. In the 2000s and 2010s interest on interactive editing of structured text encouraged the development of programs intended for scholars in the humanities an example of this is CWRC-Writer, a visual XML editor with "Close-to-WYSIWYG editing and enrichment of scholarly texts with meaningful visual representations of markup". 1 An outline of interactive editing of structured text (1980s-2020s)Īn outline of interactive editing of structured text (1980s-2020s)Īs structured WYSIWYG editor and document preparation system, TeXmacs is similar to earlier structured document editors, such as Interleaf (first release 1985), Framemaker (1986), SoftQuad Author/Editor (1988), Lilac, Grif (1991), and Thot there was also academic research into interactive editing of complex typographical constructs represented logically.TeXShop works well, and it has for years.Īgain, I understand the reasoning for the development of TeXWorks, and I applaud it (even though I would have made some changes), I just don't see a reason to develop it for OS X as long as TeXShop is a viable alternative. TeXWorks does not appear to have the first, though I don't know about the second.Įven if TeXWorks eventually gains the advantages of TeXShop, I don't see any reason to change. TeXShop has color highlighting of latex commands, and does brace completion (which is a lifesaver for me). I use TeXShop for hours on end, and if I had to look at such a UI disaster all of the time, I'd go looking for something else. If you look at TeXShop, it looks professional, it has muted colors and buttons that are obvious but don't get in the way. One reason for not giving TeXWorks a try is that the bright colors they use for icons annoys me. When I have both rendering the same file, the one in TeXShop is easier to read, but that may be contrast settings or something. TeXWorks is modelled after TeXShop, but does not have its advantages, and has (in my opinion) serious flaws.Īt one point, the pdf renderer in TeXShop was better than in TeXWorks, but that may have been fixed. I understand the reason for the development of TeXWorks, but don't see why they are trying to develop on OSX anyway.