Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pandoc

pandoc.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 298 posts

Re: Pandoc

#241

Post by ISO-morphism »

themk wrote: post #239
kugurerdem wrote: post #5

This is one of the most useful programs that I use. I use it for turning .md files into .html or .pdf. I use it for creating slides with it. I even use it for fixing the hard-wrapped text I write in vim before sending emails. When I write in vim, I prefer the text to be hard-wrapped, but for emails, I like it better when the text is not wrapped. I recommend arp242's essay explaining the problem with hard-wrapping [1]…

I thought the solution to hardwrapping in email was to use the text/plain with format=flowed. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3676

It _should_ be, but when I've tried to use format=flowed text still ends up displayed hard wrapped, especially on major mobile clients.

Re: Pandoc

#242

Post by ufmace »

susam wrote: post #47

Pandoc is the FFmpeg of document conversion! While I am very fond of both tools, Pandoc's command-line interface seamlessly integrates with my understanding and intuition, unlike FFmpeg's byzantine command line options and concepts. With FFmpeg, I frequently find myself documenting specific incantations and recipes in my notes, lest I should forget how to solve certain conversion problems. Pandoc, on the other hand,…

Funny thing, while FFmpeg's CLI options aren't super intuitive, I do find it much easier to use than any GUI video editing or conversion program I've ever found. Those things can really write the book on byzantine user interfaces. At least Google or ChatGPT can usually give me fairly clear sets of options for FFmpeg that will do what I want.

Re: Pandoc

#243

Post by MrVandemar »

enriquto wrote: post #161
_Algernon_ wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that depends if your workflow is oriented around the keyboard or the mouse. For me it is keyboard oriented and I frequently use (Ctrl)+Shift+Arrows for finegrained selection anyways so Ctrl+C/V is most convenient. I also use Vimium in my browser. If my workflow was mouse oriented I'd instead use Gesturefy. I think they're equivalent and certainly both are better than using the right-click menu.

I don't always use the mouse, but when I do, I only use the mouse, no keyboard needed at all. Using CTRL+C/V requires an unholy synchronization of mouse and keyboard. But unix-style middle-click paste is entirely mouse-controlled and very elegant. Of course, if you are inside a text file, you can use vim keyboard tricks that are even faster because you don't need to select the text.

> Using CTRL+C/V requires an unholy synchronization of mouse and keyboard.

You can select text with the keyboard by holding down the shift-key, and use the cursor-keys or use ctrl to efficiently jump by word-boundaries.

No mouse required.

Re: Pandoc

#244

Post by gertlex »

Vegenoid wrote: post #131
2cynykyl wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also use Word for all my writing too, so wanted to defend you. People (tech people at least) have lost sight of the fact that writing should happen in "word processing software", and Word is the best-in-class. To people who say "Word sux", I say "That just means you don't know how to use Word properly". Writing any markup or markdown syntax in an IDE is a disaster for the creative process. Jack Kerouac used to type…

If you want to use Word, then that's great, but when you start saying what other people 'should' be doing then they're going to speak up. > writing should happen in "word processing software" Writing should happen where you are comfortable editing text. I am comfortable in same editor where I write code. > To people who say "Word sux", I say "That just means you don't know how to use Word properly". Writing any marku…

> but when you start saying what other people 'should' be doing then they're going to speak up.

That's not a prerequisite for the Latex folks, in my experience :D

(I'm also in the "wrote my masters thesis in word, including the fair number of equations" group)

Re: Pandoc

#245

Post by __mharrison__ »

mapreduce wrote: post #46

A question to experienced Pandoc users: I want to write a small book that I want to generate in 3 formats: HTML pages, EPUB and PDF. What is the best input format (source format) for the book? Pandoc Markdown? CommonMark? GFM? I'm a little hesitant to committing myself to Pandoc Markdown or any Markdown because they all have tiny differences with each other. Each is like its own standard. I considered Org-mode for so…

Depends on what features you want in your book. Out of most of the free/open source tooling, pandoc is probably the best.

I've written multiple books with it and have also used proprietary tooling of publishers. I have a few plugins I use to customize my books, but have yet to find a tool that I wouldn't need to customize.

Re: Pandoc

#246

Post by Kamq »

2cynykyl wrote: post #57
andy99 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll probably lose some nerd cred: I do most of my writing in MS word, I find it easier to cut and paste and add footnotes and section headers. And then I use Pandoc to convert the docx into the format I want, usually HTML*. I used to do markdown in vim but I found that for most of what I do I prefer word. I do write code in vim... * I use this css file when converting: https://gist.github.com/killercup/5917178

I also use Word for all my writing too, so wanted to defend you. People (tech people at least) have lost sight of the fact that writing should happen in "word processing software", and Word is the best-in-class. To people who say "Word sux", I say "That just means you don't know how to use Word properly". Writing any markup or markdown syntax in an IDE is a disaster for the creative process. Jack Kerouac used to type…

> To people who say "Word sux", I say "That just means you don't know how to use Word properly".

"Word sux" because it takes forever to start up and I forget what I went there to type. It's like opening a jetbrains ide to take a quick note. The only time that's worth it is when I'm sitting down to write for several minutes at a time, which happens (maybe) once a quarter, vs 17 times a day for quick notes.

Now, you could argue that I just don't want what word offers, but that's what everyone means when they say something sucks. It doesn't do the thing they want (usually because the implementers made trade-offs for other things).

Re: Pandoc

#247

Post by dredmorbius »

kugurerdem wrote: post #5

This is one of the most useful programs that I use. I use it for turning .md files into .html or .pdf. I use it for creating slides with it. I even use it for fixing the hard-wrapped text I write in vim before sending emails. When I write in vim, I prefer the text to be hard-wrapped, but for emails, I like it better when the text is not wrapped. I recommend arp242's essay explaining the problem with hard-wrapping [1]…

  :set tw=0 linebreak nolist
You'll get soft-wrapped text in vim, with no line limits.

Re: Pandoc

#248

Post by throwaway81523 »

jll29 wrote: post #197
throwaway81523 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TeX documents have a distinctive look because of their typography. Back when printed resumes were a thing, whenever I saw one done in TeX, I would recognize the CM font right away. I'd then look at the resume early, since I knew that it came from a nerd. Mine was of course also done that way.

It's ideal for hiring - you immediately know which resumes to read and which one to dump into the trash.

I wouldn't dump a non-TeX one in the trash. It's just that a TeX one tends to draw my interest right away.

Re: Pandoc

#249

Post by __mharrison__ »

Diti wrote: post #77
mapreduce wrote: post #46

A question to experienced Pandoc users: I want to write a small book that I want to generate in 3 formats: HTML pages, EPUB and PDF. What is the best input format (source format) for the book? Pandoc Markdown? CommonMark? GFM? I'm a little hesitant to committing myself to Pandoc Markdown or any Markdown because they all have tiny differences with each other. Each is like its own standard. I considered Org-mode for so…

Is there any reason for why you’re not considering AsciiDoc?

I've written a book in asciidoc using proprietary tooling. It was a fine experience.

However, the open source tooling doesn't support what I need for a physical book, so I chose to use pandoc and markdown instead mostly for to the market size of markdown.

(I previously wrote my own tool chain for rst to latex and epub, so I'm week seats of what features are needed to make digital and physical books. I was sick of using a format that had limited tooling while the world had moved on to markdown.)

Re: Pandoc

#250

Post by dredmorbius »

criddell wrote: post #192
ashton314 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You lost me at “web”. Local-first is so much nicer for my workflow—and I am sure this holds for most other people.

The person I responded to uses Google Docs.

Key word, sometimes:

Closest thing that I use is Google docs, sometimes.... The reason I use vim for everything now is - I use vim for everything.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39230525>

Post reply on HN