> If the history of a scientific article would be done from conception > to publishing, I would say it starts as a pure Plain TeX document, as > there are mostly mathematical formulas plus some unstructured > comments explaining what the formulas are about, separated by you seem have a very blinkered view of what a `scientific article' is! i have written many articles as an archaeologist and computer scientist (mosty of them very bad), and I have (I think) never used a mathematical formula. > else you like (PostScript or PDF?). But trying to write a scientific > article from the scratch directly into SGML would be absurd, in my i compose in LaTeX. i have also composed in XML. really, very little difference, just a matter of < instead of \. Indeed, Phil Taylor has promoted a style of TeX coding which is <..> anyway. when i asked him the other week, he agreed it was _nearly_ parseable against a DTD. sebastian