Comments on: Good news: LaTeX submissions for PLoS ONE http://www.mailund.dk/index.php/2009/03/17/good-news-latex-submissions-for-plos-one/ Computer science, bioinformatics, genetics, and everything in between Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:35:39 +0200 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Tom http://www.mailund.dk/index.php/2009/03/17/good-news-latex-submissions-for-plos-one/comment-page-1/#comment-25699 Tom Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:18:11 +0000 http://www.mailund.dk/?p=1081#comment-25699 You should try the Equation Editor in Word 2007 and 2010. About 80% of the way to LaTeX (can't edit the pseudo-LaTeX markup, though, because it's stored as MathML internally), and looks even more beautiful than default LaTeX. Although, granted, the main reason that it looks much nicer than default LaTeX is that Computer Modern is such an awful font, while Microsoft spent the money to commission a custom math font. I mean, isn't that why people use AMS fonts in LaTeX? Anything to get away from Computer Modern. The problem isn't Word anymore. The problem is that none of the major journals support Word 2007 equations. They all require you to save down to Word 2003 and use the old Equation Editor, which dates from, what, 1995, and borders on unusable. You should try the Equation Editor in Word 2007 and 2010. About 80% of the way to LaTeX (can’t edit the pseudo-LaTeX markup, though, because it’s stored as MathML internally), and looks even more beautiful than default LaTeX.

Although, granted, the main reason that it looks much nicer than default LaTeX is that Computer Modern is such an awful font, while Microsoft spent the money to commission a custom math font. I mean, isn’t that why people use AMS fonts in LaTeX? Anything to get away from Computer Modern.

The problem isn’t Word anymore. The problem is that none of the major journals support Word 2007 equations. They all require you to save down to Word 2003 and use the old Equation Editor, which dates from, what, 1995, and borders on unusable.

]]>