开云体育

On Feb 3, 2021, at 08:24, Dragan Milivojevic <d.milivojevic@...> wrote:

Docx is not an open standard. OpenDocument is and it is an
international standard.

On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 17:03, Jim Lux <jim@...> wrote:

On 2/3/21 7:40 AM, Manfred Mornhinweg wrote:

I was also opening these docx files in OpenOffice, on my good old

Windows XP. But like Jean-Denis comments, the format gets screwed up, the
colums don't align.

Using PDF is much better. Probably pretty much any computer and similar

device in the world has a PDF reader installed, that works well. And most
text processors can write PDF files directly, and for those that cannot,
it's easy enough to print to a PDF conversion utility. So their is no good
reason to distribute text files in the internal formats of specific text
processor programs.

we're sort of getting off nanovna here, so if the moderators want to
kill it, fine.

The problem with pdf is that it's not editable. .docx and LaTeX are both
editable forms, with varying degrees of portability and cross platform
ness.

If you want to create something where others contribute changes (like a
user manual) then pdf isn't great. As others have noted, .docx is "sort
of" supported across a wide variety of readers (LibreOffice, Mac
TextEdit) - The problem I've found is that the stuff you really want to
control (page layout, tables, and image management) is the part that
breaks first. Such is life.

There are long wars about preferences for LaTeX vs MSWord, and a lot
depends on the community you come from. Academia in the physical
sciences or math - probably LaTeX; Academia in other fields - probably
Word; Industry in general - Word; US Government - Word. Cloud apps like
overleaf make working with LaTeX easier, but does require an internet
connection. There are WYSIWYG LaTeX editors out there too.

I've not had great success with various Wiki or Markdown approaches for
tutorial or reference material. Something about it causes it to
gradually degrade in formatting or to become disorganized. Pretty
rapidly, most wikis become a place where the information you need is
"somewhere" but it's hard to figure out where. Same applies to large
document repositories - I guess this is why editors and curators are
necessary, because the search engines tend to find too little or too much.


Probably what is best in the long run is how some papers are being
published - pdf or html for the text, with separate discrete files for
the images and/or tables. You can read it easily with the pdf, but if
you want to pull the full resolution figure, or import the tabular data,
it's available. My own preference is that if you used software to
generate the data plots, can you provide the data and the software code
used for the plot (usually Matlab or Python). That makes it possible to
regenerate the plot, or add data to it, or add markings, which is often
handy.

On 2/3/21 7:40 AM, Manfred Mornhinweg wrote:

I was also opening these docx files in OpenOffice, on my good old

Windows XP. But like Jean-Denis comments, the format gets screwed up, the
colums don't align.

Using PDF is much better. Probably pretty much any computer and similar

device in the world has a PDF reader installed, that works well. And most
text processors can write PDF files directly, and for those that cannot,
it's easy enough to print to a PDF conversion utility. So their is no good
reason to distribute text files in the internal formats of specific text
processor programs.

we're sort of getting off nanovna here, so if the moderators want to
kill it, fine.

The problem with pdf is that it's not editable. .docx and LaTeX are both
editable forms, with varying degrees of portability and cross platform
ness.

If you want to create something where others contribute changes (like a
user manual) then pdf isn't great. As others have noted, .docx is "sort
of" supported across a wide variety of readers (LibreOffice, Mac
TextEdit) - The problem I've found is that the stuff you really want to
control (page layout, tables, and image management) is the part that
breaks first. Such is life.

There are long wars about preferences for LaTeX vs MSWord, and a lot
depends on the community you come from. Academia in the physical
sciences or math - probably LaTeX; Academia in other fields - probably
Word; Industry in general - Word; US Government - Word. Cloud apps like
overleaf make working with LaTeX easier, but does require an internet
connection. There are WYSIWYG LaTeX editors out there too.

I've not had great success with various Wiki or Markdown approaches for
tutorial or reference material. Something about it causes it to
gradually degrade in formatting or to become disorganized. Pretty
rapidly, most wikis become a place where the information you need is
"somewhere" but it's hard to figure out where. Same applies to large
document repositories - I guess this is why editors and curators are
necessary, because the search engines tend to find too little or too much.


Probably what is best in the long run is how some papers are being
published - pdf or html for the text, with separate discrete files for
the images and/or tables. You can read it easily with the pdf, but if
you want to pull the full resolution figure, or import the tabular data,
it's available. My own preference is that if you used software to
generate the data plots, can you provide the data and the software code
used for the plot (usually Matlab or Python). That makes it possible to
regenerate the plot, or add data to it, or add markings, which is often
handy.

David Eckhardt < davearea51a@... > hat am 01.02.2021 23:00
geschrieben:




I promised this, so here it is. See the attachment for a procedure to
measure the CM attenuation through CMCs and other 4-terminal devices (as
in
s-parameters). Comments and improvements are welcome before I post it to
the files section.


Dave - W?LEV