[OS X TeX] Meta-data facilities: was TeXShop's %& ugly bug
curt.clifton at mac.com
Tue Sep 14 09:11:50 EDT 2004
On Sep 14, 2004, at 4:48 AM, Jérôme Laurens wrote:
>> How can "intended typesetting script" be too complex to include in an
>> XML file? XML can represent arbitrary directed graphs.
> Yes, of course, you can implement easily the %! program = feature
> TeXShop implements. But this is extremely limited.
> How would you encode the BibTeX options the german user prefer?
> How do you encode the engine used for the bibliography (there is a
> forthcoming MLBibTeX which extends BibTeX)?
I'm sorry, I assumed that since you did development work you would
understand "arbitrary directed graphs". Anything that can be described
by a context-free grammar (i.e., any common programming language,
scripting language, or command line command) can be represented by a
directed graph. (In fact, by an acyclic directed graph.) I'm not
suggesting a particular encoding; I'm merely refuting your claim that
"intended typesetting script" is too complex to encode in XML. That is
> This "typesetting script encoding" should not be TeXShop centric, nor
> even mac centric: this must fit the widest range of frontends whatever
> system is used.
I am certainly not trying to argue that TeXShop is the right answer to
all problems. I regularly collaborate with co-authors running both
Solaris and Windows, so I'm also not trying to find a Mac-centric
solution. I am trying to get a clear, accurate description from you of
what it is you are proposing. Spurious claims that "intended
typesetting scripts" are too complex to include in an XML file, and so
we must adopt your wrapper idea, do not further your argument. Rather,
they weaken it by demonstrating a lack of understanding. This isn't to
say that I think your wrapper idea is faulty, just that parts of your
>> Is your TUG paper available on-line?
> See my TeX Wrapper Structure mail.
>>> All the frontend specific data have nothing to do with that and must
>>> live somewhere else
>> Why couldn't the XML schema for the project be extensible to include
>> front-end specific elements? It would be simple to require that
>> front-ends ignore elements that they do not understand. This way
>> iTeXMac and TeXShop specific data (for example) could live in
>> separate branches of the XML tree without interfering. One could
>> also use attributes attached to a "frontend" element:
> - well XML files are not suitable for everything.
I heartily agree.
> - If you only need the information stored in a subtree, you must
> manage the whole tree'
As I said before, standard library code can easily manage the rest of
> - if 2 apps want to manage their own data (for example a text editor
> and a pdf viewer), they might have to write concurrently the same
> files. it may lead to synch problems...
Now this is a good argument.
> - The file system already has a tree structure.
> So if the information follows a tree structures, some subtrees might
> be stored as xml file, some leaves might be stored as single files and
> other subtrees as directories. For some data, the single XML file is
> more suitable, for other kind of information, a mixed mode seems more
OK, now your wrapper idea is starting to make sense to me.
> Moreover, having a metadata folder in which you can put any kind of
> thing is much more comfortable than a xml tree, for example the TeX
> engine knows about the file system, but does not know anything of XML.
> We can imagine to create a smart copy of the tex sources in the meta
> data folder: duplicate the file hierarchy as smart links and run TeX
> against the links. All these aux files are created in the smart
> hierarchy and the original folders are left untouched. This would be
> consistent because these aux file are just cached data, another kind
> of meta information.
I don't understand how putting the aux files in a separate directory
maintains cross-platform capability. For example, while working on a
paper, one of my co-authors did not want to deal with my bibliography
(.bib) files. So I would generate the .bbl file with BiBTeX and
include it in the CVS repository that we shared. He could then
re-typeset the paper---provided he didn't change the
references---without access to the bibliography files. If the .bbl
file were put in a separate "meta-data" directory, how would LaTeX on
another platform find it?
I wonder if the community would be better served by a discussion of the
requirements for a meta-data facility, rather than lobbying for a
particular solution. So far it seems that the requirements are:
1. The meta-data facility must provide information needed by a variety
of front-ends, viewers, or typesetting engines (hereafter, "utilities")
a. It should not be possible for meta-data for one utility to be
accidentally interpreted as meta-data for another utility.
b. If two utilities are running simultaneously, they should not
corrupt each others meta-data.
c. Newer systems must respect the meta-data facilities of existing
2. The meta-data facility must be cross-platform compatible.
a. At a minimum, it must be possible to use standard utilities on
non-Mac platforms without corrupting the meta-data.
b. The meta-data should be useable by meta-data-aware utilities on
3. The meta-data facility should help to hide the complexity of TeX.
TeXShop's %& "bug" fails to satisfy 1a and c. A single (XML) meta-data
file fails to satisfy 1b. I question whether 3 is a valid
requirement---certainly 1 and 2 would take priority over 3. For
example, storing .bbl files in the same directory as the source
document is part of the meta-data facility for BiBTeX. Thus, putting
this data in a subdirectory to satisfy 3 would violate 1c. So I would
argue that the .bbl files must stay in the source document directory.
Are there other requirements for a meta-data facility?
This is an interesting discussion. Thanks for sharing your ideas!
Curtis Clifton, PhD Candidate
Dept. of Computer Science, Iowa State University
--------------------- Info ---------------------
Mac-TeX Website: http://www.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/
& FAQ: http://latex.yauh.de/faq/
TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
List Post: <mailto:MacOSX-TeX at email.esm.psu.edu>
More information about the MacOSX-TeX