[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Re: How to write a "proper" math document

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg120124] Re: How to write a "proper" math document
• From: AES <siegman at stanford.edu>
• Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 07:31:11 -0400 (EDT)
• References: <201107041044.GAA02461@smc.vnet.net> <iuukk8$epi$1@smc.vnet.net> <15944200.6757.1309943765495.JavaMail.root@m06> <iv45b8$es8$1@smc.vnet.net> <iv6gqo$s5p$1@smc.vnet.net>

In article <iv6gqo$s5p$1 at smc.vnet.net>,
 Richard Fateman <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> We need
> > the same kind of thought given to active and dynamic documents as Edward
> > Tufte has given to data graphics.
> 
> Yes, I agree entirely here.  I think that Tufte is hard to match.

Have to say that, back sometime around the early 1990s, which I was 
voluntarily teaching a small course for EE students in preparing demos 
and graphic displays on the Mac using QuickBasic (or was it Real Basic?) 
I bought Tufte to see what it might have to tell me the graphic of data 
and computed results -- and decided it had nothing really useful to say, 
was as over-hyped as it was empty of meaningful content, and discarded 
it.

Maybe I should look again . . .

• References:
  • Re: How to write a "proper" math document
    • From: dr DanW <dmaxwarren@gmail.com>