#Texmacs bibtex software#

It belongs to one of the outer circles of the TeX community along with software like Asymptote, Biber, LyX, MetaPost, the TikZ output module in Geogebra etc. It uses the TeX fonts, it uses BibTeX for bibliography management, it appears (to me, an outsider) to use a typesetting model based on TeX, and it can be used to generate TeX output. It seems to be intended to be a sort of spiritual successor to TeX, and my impression is that a lot of what happens under the hood is a reworking of TeX. In my personal, controversial opinion, TeXmacs is a child of the TeX community, not only because of its name.

As for the more nebulous topics of what you should be doing with the software typography-wise, I'm sure such questions would be welcome on GraphicDesign.Īs always, read each site's help section to determine if your question is or is not on-topic before asking it there.

Since it uses a Lisp for customization, I wouldn't be surprised to find some questions about customization on StackOverflow. So, where do these questions belong? TeXmacs is just another application after all, so questions about using it are on-topic for SuperUser. As such, texmacs should join mathjax as a tag-flag for off-topic questions. I come to the conclusion that texmacs is ultimately the same as mathjax: both of these technologies draw from the long history of TeX (whether to use familiar syntax or a familiar name), but neither actually involve TeX in any step of the process. While I don't personally like LyX questions here, at least they have the virtue of relying on TeX to get the job done. Repeating what's been said in the comments, TeXmacs ultimately uses a completely distinct typesetting engine that isn't TeX to produce its output. I'd put forth that TeXmacs should not be considered on-topic unless perhaps it's about its TeX export options (and even then, the idea leaves a bad taste in my mouth).