home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!uknet!strath-cs!cen.ex.ac.uk!CDLatham
- From: CDLatham@cen.ex.ac.uk (C.D.Latham)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn
- Subject: Re: RISC OS 3 Impression...
- Message-ID: <BxLL5H.724@cen.ex.ac.uk>
- Date: 12 Nov 92 10:00:53 GMT
- References: <27916@castle.ed.ac.uk> <1992Nov10.125838.19939@gate.esat.kuleuven.ac.be>
- <BxJsy9.5M0@cen.ex.ac.uk> <1992Nov11.170447.29002@news2.cis.umn.edu>
- Sender: CDLatham@cen.ex.ac.uk
- Organization: Computer Unit. - University of Exeter. UK
- Lines: 24
- In-Reply-To: alla0008@student.tc.umn.edu's message of 11 Nov 92 17:04:47 GMT
-
- In article <1992Nov11.170447.29002@news2.cis.umn.edu> alla0008@student.tc.umn.edu (Graham Allan) writes:
- > Any hints/rumours about possible new features/abilities/(bugs)?
- > Does "major new version" imply a similar jump to Impression ->
- > Impression II?
-
- That was the impression (sorry) that I got. There is a need for
- better scientific publishing software for the Arc and this is one area
- that the man from CC wished to address. In particular, many learned
- journals accept contibutions in Tex format. Tex is a horrible thing
- and most people don't want that sort of brain damage, so CC were
- thinking of including some sort of support. It would certainly be
- imperfect but something would be better than nothing.
-
- On a related topic, I also tackled the Minerva team, including their
- managing director, about Graphbox and Graphbox-pro which have very
- poor support for people wishing to produce technical documents. They
- expressed a hope that something could be done in future releases but,
- sadly, I left feeling unconvinced.
-
- Arc software is second to none when it comes to almost all aspects of
- producing publication quality documents except for scientific and
- technical work where there is a huge deficiency.
- --
- Christopher.
-