Despite the "Gold-suite" comparison, when looking at the KaTeX and RaTeX output [1], the KaTeX output is consistently better. RaTeX has either a lot of aliasing going on or appears blurry.
But the native and library nature of RaTeX is very interesting, especially with the provided C ABI.
Are you viewing on a HiDPI monitor? I imagine this is mostly because RaTeX renders to an image whereas KaTeX is rendering HTML, so can scale to arbitrary dpi. I imagine the RaTeX people could have rendered to a higher resolution and it would look better.
If it's an open source project that has been used by others, please consider giving out maintainer access to others (now or later).
It's sad, when projects are abandoned and a whole bunch of users would be willing to (partially) maintain it, but the key holder implicitly or explicitly decided that nobody else should have access.
Forks are not he same: It's very hard to get enough traction with existing users and the discoverability is terrible.
Kindly disagree. If I don't want to work on a project anymore, I also don't want to spend time finding a new maintainer, or just take the responsibility to endorse a random person on the internet.
A fork solves that. And potential maintainers willing to work together on a fork can open an issue and talk about it. The reality being that more often than not, people think that they are willing to keep maintaining it, but in practice they just won't.
As maintainer I won't be able to give you an unbiased response. The biggest difference is, that SFML is a C++ library.
What motivates me to work on SFML is, that we're building something separate from SDL. I don't think, we - as in the general developer world - do anyone a favor in consolidating everything into one library (why use X, when Y does the same?). Additionally, I think it's a very interesting "field" of trying to provide a common API across different OS; and sadly it seems to be an area where few resources exist and fewer developer actually understand it, as "everyone" just uses SDL. Finally, I really like the open and welcoming community we've built over the years and at the same time, I'm happy we're not getting as much attention/pressure as SDL.
I appreciate the response. I've actually got my own platform-layer which can be a bit like SDL/SFML in shape at times, so I totally understand the desire to work on that kind of problem. I'm good with different competing solutions in similar spaces, as well. I don't think one library to rule them all is necessarily a good idea.
Lately I've been doing the experiment of just forgoing the library entirely for this kind of code. It's a bit like gradually building up my own SDL/SFML directly in-place. I'm sure people would find that wasteful or odd, but I enjoy learning the differences in the platforms, and being better positioned to integrate with a particular platform. I'm also shipping way less code. Although admittedly I'm not sure if I'd do this if I were a C++ dev, I write Odin and part of the experiment is putting Odin through its paces and seeing how well it fits in this part of the stack (very happy so far.)
Different Nature paper from last year. The article is regurgitating stuff that happened in 2023, with a 2026 byline date.
Your paper, on the other hand, seems to be comparing three different scanning methods (radar, ultrasound, and resistivity) for measuring the thickness of the chevron block in front of the North Face Corridor. So not related.
OnlyOffice, Nextcloud OPffice, Collabora might all have free offerings to a degree, but you'll end up at the mercy of the companies behind those tools and OnlyOffice comes with Enterprise offering that does also cost money.
Costing money isn't necessarily bad, but it's also hard to beat free & libre.
But I have to say that I got quite used to collaborative editing, not something I'd like to give up.
People can get used to buttons moving to other places (imo), but collecting and integrating edits from multiple people via email is not something I look back at fondly.
Yeah, then again most people haven't experienced this and are happy to just enable "track changes" in Word and send the document back and forth, maybe if you're lucky, it's hosted on SharePoint or OneDrive.
The discussion requirement is often to prevent disappointment, waste of time, and anger, when maintainers simple close PRs, because it's not the direction they want the project to go. A lot of people will take this very personally, so it's much better to have a conversation about it beforehand.
But the native and library nature of RaTeX is very interesting, especially with the provided C ABI.
[1] https://ratex.lites.dev/demo/support-table
reply