Re: [O] Efficiency of Org v. LaTeX v. Word

[Christopher W. Ryan]

This seems like more of a typing contest than anything else. Reproducing
a single page of an already-typeset document is not what LaTeX is
designed for, nor is it what scientists do for a living. The test
selections were absurdly short relative to the typical scientic
manuscript. Long and complex documents are where LaTeX excels. And this
did not call upon some of the most important (IMHO) capabilities of
LaTeX: managing citations with BibTex; changing the style to suit
different journals; storing, revisiting, and reusing your document years
later.

--Chris Ryan

Ken Mankoff wrote:
> 
> People here might be interested in a publication from [2014-12-19 Fri]
> available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115069
> 
> Title: An Efficiency Comparison of Document Preparation Systems Used
> in Academic Research and Development
> 
> Summary: Word users are more efficient and have less errors than even
> experienced LaTeX users.
> 
> Someone here should repeat experiment and add Org into the mix, perhaps
> Org -> ODT and/or Org -> LaTeX and see if it helps or hurts. I assume
> Org would trump LaTeX, but would Org -> ODT or Org -> X -> DOCX (via
> pandoc) beat straight Word?
> 
>   -k.
> 
>