Re: scientific publishing process (was Re: Cost and access)

On 2014-10-07 15:44, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> Well, I remain totally unconvinced that any current HTML solution is as
> good as the current PDF setup.  Certainly htlatex is not suitable.
> There may be some way to get tex4ht to do better, but no one has
> provided a solution. Sarven Capadisli sent me some HTML that looks much
> better, but even on a math-light paper I could see a number of
> glitches.  I haven't seen anything better than that.

Would you mind creating an issue for the glitches that you are experiencing?

https://github.com/csarven/linked-research/issues

Please mention your environment and the documents you've looked at. Also 
keep in mind the LNCS and ACM SIG authoring guidelines. The purpose of 
the LNCS and ACM CSS is to adhere to the authoring guidelines so that 
the the generated PDF file or print output looks as expected (within 
reason).

Much appreciated!

-Sarven
http://csarven.ca/#i