[Insight-developers] LaTeX style for Documentation

[Miller, James V (CRD)]

Luis,

These documents look pretty good.  I have one suggestion.  Its been about 4 years since I used LaTeX
so there may be a newer way to do this:

These current styles use the "times" package which uses standard postscript fonts instead of the
computer modern fonts.  This is the best option for producing professional looking output.  (It has
an added benefit that times is a little smaller than cmr.  This is key when you are trying to fit a
paper into a page limit.) However, the "times" package does not replace the fonts that are used for
mathematics.  So standard resolution dependent TeX fonts are used in all the equations.  This looks
rather ugly.

What I used to do in my latex files was

\usepackage{t1enc} 
\usepackage{newlfont} 
\usepackage{epsfig} 
\usepackage{times} % replace all TeX fonts with Postscript fonts
\usepackage{amsmath}     
\usepackage{pifont}
\usepackage{mathptm}
\usepackage{xspace}
\usepackage{fancyheadings}

I think the key packages here are the "mathptm" package and "pifont" package.  These replace the
TeX's standard math fonts with postscript fonts (mostly from the symbol font).  I can't recall
whether "amsmath" was needed or not. I have used the above for formatting my thesis and for technical
papers and don't recall missing any constructs (but I was using mostly summations and matrix
representations).

Anyway, using this collection of packages replaced all the equation fonts with postscript fonts (just
like the times package replaces the computer modern font with times/helvetica).

Do you know if there is a "new" way to use postscript fonts for formatting equations instead of TeX
fonts?






-----Original Message-----
From: Luis Ibanez [mailto:ibanez@cs.unc.edu]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 9:51 PM
To: Will Schroeder; George Stetten; Vikram Chalana
Cc: Insight-developers (E-mail)
Subject: [Insight-developers] LaTeX style for Documentation



According to the Tcon discussion concerning documentation,
Doxygen doesn't seems to be the appropiated tool developing
the manuals/guides books.

More control can be gained over the formatting by writting
directly on LaTeX. 

One of the best documentations on LaTeX is the one developed
for Python (http://www.python.org). Using their style files
a proposed set of LaTeX style files has been created for Insight.



They have been checked in:

    InsightDocuments/Latex (a new directory)

We can modify the styles for fitting the appearance we decide
to give to the manuals. New macros and commands can be added 
to these files in the future.


Among the relevant files:

InsightManual.cls : style file derived from "book" 

InsightHowto.cls  : style file derived from "report"

Insight.sty       : generic style file plenty of \itk@ commands

License.tex       : the text of the license to be included in
                    other .tex files

Copyright.tex     : copyright text to be included in other
                    .tex files

InsightPaper.sty  : definition of paper size for the manuals

fncychap.sty      : a 'stolen' style for making documents look
                    less like standard LaTeX  :-)


An example of how to use them has been checked in 


InsightDocuments/User/AlgoritmsGuide 

- AlgorithmsGuide.tex       :  main file
- ImageIteratorsChapter.tex : description of image iterators
    this file will probaly end up somewhere else, the fact of 
    keeping it in its own chapter simplifies to move it to any 
    other manual. It is \input'ed in the main AlgorithmsGuide.tex 
    file.

- NeighborhoodIteratorsChapter.tex : same comment as above

- RegistrationFrameworkChapter.tex : Description of the use of
      the registration framework.


- Makefile :  I guess this one will be replaced by some CMakeList.txt

- some .fig files (from xfig) and their corresponding .eps files.


The resulting AlgorithmsGuide.pdf is also checked in.


An example of a HowTo type of document is under 

- RegistrationHowto.tex  -> pdf 

This are shorter documents with a report style for treating 
a very specific subject.  Don't know if that's a style we want
to follow. They should be like documents of 10 pages explaining
for example how to add a new optimizer to the toolkit.



Luis



_______________________________________________
Insight-developers mailing list
Insight-developers@public.kitware.com
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers