1 files changed, 37 insertions, 30 deletions
diff --git a/doc/context/sources/general/manuals/musings/musings-whytex.tex b/doc/context/sources/general/manuals/musings/musings-whytex.tex
index 6186c4a0f..97dc06285 100644
--- a/doc/context/sources/general/manuals/musings/musings-whytex.tex
+++ b/doc/context/sources/general/manuals/musings/musings-whytex.tex
@@ -6,6 +6,12 @@
 
 \startchapter[title={Why use \TEX ?}]
 
+\startlines \setupalign[flushright]
+Hans Hagen
+Hasselt NL
+July 2021 (public 2023)
+\stoplines
+
 \startsection[title={Introduction}]
 
 Let's assume that you know what \TEX\ is: a program that interprets a language
@@ -15,16 +21,17 @@ a button and get some typeset result in return. After a while you start tweaking
 this black box, meet other users (on the web), become more fluent and stick to it
 forever.
 
-But now let's assume that you don't know \TEX\ and are in search of a system
-that helps you create beautiful documents in an efficient way. When your
-documents have a complex structure you are probably willing to spend some time on
-figuring out what the best tool is. Even if a search lets you end up with
-something called \TEX, a three letter word with a dropped E, you still don't
-know what it is. Advertisement for \TEX\ is often pretty weak. It's rather easy
-to point to the numerous documents that can be found on the web. But what exactly
-does \TEX\ do and what are its benefits? In order to answer this we need to know
-who you are: an author, editor, an organization that deals with documents or needs
-to generate readable output, like publishers do.
+But now let's assume that you don't know \TEX\ and are in search of a system that
+helps you create beautiful documents in an efficient way. When your documents
+have a complex structure you are probably willing to spend some time on figuring
+out what the best tool is. Even if a search lets you end up with something called
+\TEX, a three letter word with a dropped E, you still don't know what it is. It
+helps to search for \type {\TeX} which is pronounced as \type {tech}.
+Advertisement for \TEX\ is often pretty weak. It's rather easy to point to the
+numerous documents that can be found on the web. But what exactly does \TEX\ do
+and what are its benefits? In order to answer this we need to know who you are:
+an author, editor, an organization that deals with documents or needs to generate
+readable output, like publishers do.
 
 \stopsection
 
@@ -37,7 +44,6 @@ by \TEX\ look great.} but they do advocate that for rendering math it is a prett
 good system. The source code of these documents often look rather messy and
 unattractive and for a non|-|math user it can be intimidating. Choosing some
 lightweight click|-|and|-|ping alternative looks attractive.
-lightweight click|-|and|-|ping alternative looks attractive.
 
 Making \TEX\ popular is not going to happen by convincing those who have to write
 an occasional letter or report. They should just use whatever suits them. On the
@@ -79,7 +85,7 @@ an obvious choice, but if you're a bit able to use it it's hard to beat in
 quality, flexibility and efficiency. I'm often surprised that companies are
 willing to pay a fortune for functionality that basically comes for free.
 Programmers are accustomed to running commands and working in a code editor with
-syntax highlighting so that helps too. They too recognize when something can be
+syntax highlighting so that helps too. They also recognize when something can be
 done more efficiently.
 
 When you need to go from some kind of input (document source, database,
@@ -222,17 +228,17 @@ philosophy and we like the community. It is actually not really giving us an
 advantage commercially: it costs way more to develop, support and keep
 up|-|to|-|date than it will ever return. We can come up with better, faster and
 easier solutions and in the end we pay the price because it takes less time to
-cook up styles. So there is some backslash involved because commercially a
+cook up styles. So there is some back slash involved because commercially a
 difficult solution leads to more billable hours. Luckily we tend to avoid wasting
 time so we improve when possible and then it ends up in the distributed code.
 And, once the solution is there, anyone can use it. Basically also for us it's
-just a tool, like the operating system, editor and viewer are. So, what keep
+just a tool, like the operating system, editor and viewer are. So, what keeps
 development going is mostly the interaction with the community. This also means
-that a customer can't really demand functionality for free: either wait for it to
-show up or pay for it (which seldom happens). Open source is not equivalent with
-\quotation {You get immediately what you want because someone out there writes
-the code.}. There has to be a valid reason and often it's just users and meetings
-or just some challenge that drives it.
+that a customer can't really demand functionality for free: either do it
+yourself, wait for it to show up, or pay for it (which seldom happens). Open
+source is not equivalent with \quotation {You get immediately what you want
+because someone out there writes the code.}. There has to be a valid reason and
+often it's just users and meetings or just some challenge that drives it.
 
 This being said, it is hard to convince a company to use \TEX. It has to come
 from users in the organization. Or, what we sometimes see with publishers, it
@@ -307,17 +313,18 @@ message.
 
 The \TEX\ ecosystem was among the first in supporting for instance \OPENTYPE, and
 the community even made sure that there were free fonts available. A format like
-\PDF\ was supported as soon as it shows up and \TEX\ was the first to demonstrate
-what advanced features were there and how way it was to adapt to changes.
-Processing \XML\ using \TEX\ has never been a big deal and if that is a reason to
-look at this already old and mature technology, then an organization can wonder
-if years and opportunities (for instance for publishing on demand or easy
-updating of manuals) have been lost. Of course there are (and have been)
-alternative tools but the arguments for using \TEX\ or not are not much different
-now. It can be bad marketing of open and free software. It can be that \TEX\ has
-been around too long. It can also be that its message was not understood yet. On
-the other hand, in software development it's quite common to reinvent wheels and
-present old as new. It's never to late to catch on.
+\PDF\ was supported as soon as it showed up and \TEX\ was the first to
+demonstrate what advanced features were there and it shows again how it is
+possible to adapt \TEX\ to changes in its environment. Processing \XML\ using
+\TEX\ has never been a big deal and if that is a reason to look at this already
+old and mature technology, then an organization can wonder if years and
+opportunities (for instance for publishing on demand or easy updating of manuals)
+have been lost. Of course there are (and have been) alternative tools but the
+arguments for using \TEX\ or not are not much different now. It can be bad
+marketing of open and free software. It can be that \TEX\ has been around too
+long. It can also be that its message was not understood yet. On the other hand,
+in software development it's quite common to reinvent wheels and present old as
+new. It's never too late to catch on.
 
 \stopsection