In article <CDrB3v.59n at festival.ed.ac.uk> eang62 at castle.ed.ac.uk (Herbert Sauro) writes:
>>Thanks John for starting the FAQ. I think I probably agree with you
>on the definitions you gave that distinguished MCA from MCT.
>>I have a suggestion that we use TeX/LaTeX to format any mathematical
>stuff that we might put into the FAQ, any votes/comments on this? Maybe
>both ascii and TeX forms should be present? In the past I've noticed
>that some email abstracts that contained some maths looked a bit odd
>in pure ascii, especially when there were a lot of subscripts etc in the
>equations. Secondly, if we use TeX notation then people can cut out the
>equations and use them in their own documents (assuming they use TeX). I
>know a lot of us MCAers now use TeX so perhaps this is not such a bad
>idea.
>>Herbert Sauro
I would suggest that the FAQ is in PostScript format instead of (La)Tex
and of course in addition to a plain ASCII version. PostScript is
far more available than LaTex. There are actually people who use modern
word processors such as Word or WordPerfect where one directly edits
equations without having to know LaTex. The people who use LaTex most
likely can print PostScript files in order to obtain pretty equations.
BTW, I agree with the current definitions of MCT and MCA in the FAQ.
Robert Aarts.
