Collaborative Writing with TeXmacs: Plugins and Version ControlTeXmacs is a free, extensible WYSIWYG editor designed for creating high-quality technical documents. Its focus on structured, semantically rich documents and strong support for mathematical typesetting make it a compelling choice for academics, scientists, and technical writers. When multiple authors are involved, collaborative workflows must handle concurrent editing, consistent document structure, version history, and integrations with tools such as issue trackers, reference managers, and code execution environments. This article explores strategies and practical setups for collaborative writing with TeXmacs, covering plugins, version control systems, collaboration workflows, conflict resolution, and tips to maximize productivity.
Why use TeXmacs for collaborative writing?
TeXmacs combines the visual ease of WYSIWYG editors with semantic document structure similar to LaTeX. Key advantages for teams:
- Structured documents: Clear separation of content elements (sections, environments, formulas) reduces merge ambiguity.
- Math-first support: Native math editor and automatic spacing make collaborative authoring of technical material smoother than general-purpose document editors.
- Extensibility: Lisp-based scripting and an architecture that supports plugins allow integrations with external tools.
- Multiple export formats: Exports to LaTeX, HTML, PDF, and other formats let collaborators work with their preferred toolchains.
File formats and collaboration readiness
TeXmacs saves documents in an XML-like native format (.tm). For collaboration, that format’s properties matter:
- Text-based, structured files: Unlike binary formats, .tm files can be diffed and merged, though the structure and non-line-oriented nature can complicate simple text diffs.
- Whitespace and attribute changes: Some edits change attributes or ordering in ways that make diffs noisier; care in editing style reduces unnecessary differences.
- Exported artifacts: Generated PDFs and HTML are binary or derived outputs and should typically be excluded from version control to avoid large diffs.
Recommended repository layout:
- docs/
- manuscript.tm
- figures/
- bibliography.bib
- images/
- build/ (ignored)
- .gitignore (exclude PDFs, intermediate exports, editor backups)
Version control systems: Git and alternatives
Git is the de facto choice for collaborative writing with TeXmacs, but other systems can be used depending on team preferences.
- Git
- Pros: distributed, powerful branching, widespread tooling, GitHub/GitLab/Bitbucket for hosting and code review.
- Best practices: commit frequently, use descriptive messages, and adopt feature branches for major sections.
- Mercurial and Fossil
- Alternatives with simpler UX for some teams; support basic branching and history.
- Centralized systems (Subversion)
- Still usable, but less convenient for offline work and branching.
Use branch-based workflows:
- feature branches for chapters or major revisions
- pull requests/merge requests for review with CI checks (see below)
- protected main branch, linear history policy if desired
Diffing and merging TeXmacs documents
Because .tm files are structured XML-like documents, standard line-based diffs can be harder to interpret. Strategies to improve diffs and merges:
- Normalize files before committing: adopt a consistent pretty-printing or formatting policy so diffs reflect content changes, not incidental formatting.
- Use TeXmacs’ export to a line-friendly representation (if available) or a canonicalized XML serializer. If your team writes a small script to pretty-print .tm files deterministically, include it as a pre-commit hook.
- Avoid simultaneous edits of the same granular unit (for instance, the same paragraph or formula). Split work by sections or use locking (see next).
- For conflicts, prefer manual resolution within TeXmacs to ensure structure and equations remain valid—open both conflicting versions in TeXmacs to visually inspect and merge.
Example Git workflow for conflict resolution:
- Pull remote changes.
- If merge conflict occurs on manuscript.tm, check out each branch’s version into separate files (manuscript.branchA.tm, manuscript.branchB.tm).
- Open both in TeXmacs and the merged file to resolve structure and visual differences.
- Save resolved manuscript.tm and commit.
Locking and coordination strategies
Some teams prefer opportunistic locking to avoid merge conflicts for large monolithic files:
- Section-level files: break the document into smaller .tm files (one per chapter or section) and include them via input/import mechanisms. This reduces conflict surface.
- Soft locking with conventions: use an AUTHORS or TODO file where contributors claim sections they are editing.
- Repository hooks for locks: implement a simple lock file mechanism (e.g., create .locks/section1.lock) that is respected by team convention or enforced via server-side hooks.
- Centralized editing sessions: occasional synchronous sessions where multiple authors edit and discuss changes in real time, then commit together.
Plugins and integrations to enhance collaboration
TeXmacs supports scripting and extensions; here are practical plugins and integrations to consider:
- Git integration plugin
- Provides status, diff, and basic commit operations from within the editor. Useful to reduce context switching.
- Reference manager connectors
- Integrations with BibTeX/BibLaTeX and tools like Zotero (via exported .bib) let teams maintain a central bibliography. Consider using a shared .bib file in the repo.
- Spell-check and grammar tools
- LanguageTool or other grammar-check integrations (if available) can be run locally or via CI to enforce style.
- Issue tracker hooks
- Include links to issues in commit messages or use plugins that show issue status within the editor.
- Build/preview plugins
- Live export to PDF or HTML for previewing changes and verifying layout before committing.
- Custom macros and templates
- Shared macros and templates stored in the repository ensure consistent styling and simplify contributions.
- Scripting for canonicalization
- A small plugin or external script that canonicalizes .tm files (consistent attribute order, normalized whitespace) improves diffs and merges.
If a ready-made plugin doesn’t exist, TeXmacs’ extensible Lisp-based environment makes it possible to script these behaviors.
Continuous integration (CI) and automated checks
CI pipelines help maintain document quality and catch issues early:
- Typical CI steps
- Linting: run a .tm canonicalizer or style checker.
- Build: export to PDF/HTML and fail on errors.
- Spelling/grammar checks: run LanguageTool or similar on exported text.
- Citation checks: ensure bibliography compiles and citation keys resolve.
- Platforms: GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, or other CI services.
- Artifacts: store compiled PDFs as CI artifacts for reviewers to download; avoid committing them to the repo.
Sample CI benefits:
- Automatic builds validate that merged changes produce a valid output.
- Reviewers can inspect generated PDFs to see final layout without needing TeXmacs locally.
Collaborative review and commenting
TeXmacs doesn’t natively offer cloud-style in-document comments the way Google Docs does, but teams can implement review workflows:
- Inline comments via annotations
- Use TeXmacs’ note/annotation features to leave review comments inside the document; ensure those annotations are committed so others see them.
- External review tools
- Use the hosting platform’s pull request review system for line-based comments referencing sections or PDF pages.
- PDF review
- Export a PDF and use PDF annotation tools for reviewers who prefer marking up final layout; then integrate feedback by editing the .tm source.
- Issue-tracked comments
- Create issues for larger changes and reference them in commits; link issues to sections or chunks via anchors.
Best practices for multi-author writing
- Modularize the document: split into chapter/section files to minimize conflicts.
- Use a shared bibliography file and a consistent citation style.
- Agree on a canonical .tm formatting rule and enforce it with pre-commit hooks.
- Commit frequently with descriptive messages that reference issues or tasks.
- Make small, focused commits (one logical change per commit) to ease review.
- Reserve major structural edits (re-organizing chapters) for coordination windows or a single author.
- Keep generated outputs out of version control; rely on CI for builds.
- Keep macros and templates in a shared directory in the repo so all contributors use the same styling.
Example workflow (small research team)
- Initialize a Git repo with one .tm per chapter and a shared bibliography.bib.
- Each author creates a feature branch for their chapter or task.
- Work locally, commit changes, and push branch to remote.
- Open a merge request; CI builds PDF and runs spellcheck.
- Reviewers annotate the PDF and leave comments on the MR.
- Author addresses comments, updates .tm files, and pushes fixes.
- Merge after CI passes and approvals; delete branch.
Handling large collaborative projects and publications
For books or long technical documents:
- Consider a top-level build system (Makefile or script) to assemble chapter .tm files, build indexes, run bibliography tools, and generate final outputs.
- Use release tagging for publication-ready versions.
- Maintain a changelog or release notes documenting substantive changes between versions.
- For publisher workflows requiring LaTeX: export TeXmacs to LaTeX and include a validation step in CI to ensure the exported LaTeX compiles and meets publisher requirements.
Troubleshooting common issues
- Merge conflicts in .tm files
- Resolve by opening both versions in TeXmacs, copying the intended content into a clean file, and committing.
- Spurious diffs due to formatting
- Add a canonicalizer/prettifier to the workflow and run it automatically before commits.
- Broken macros after merges
- Keep macro definitions centralized and avoid redefining locally; run a style-check CI job to detect missing macros.
- Bibliography mismatches
- Lock bibliography format and use a shared .bib file; CI should fail if citations are unresolved.
Conclusion
TeXmacs is well suited for collaborative technical writing when combined with sensible version control practices, modular document structure, and a small set of integrations and automation. Use Git (or a suitable alternative) for history and branching, split large documents into smaller files, adopt canonicalization to reduce noisy diffs, and add CI to build and lint documents. Plugins or lightweight scripts for Git integration, bibliography management, and previewing will reduce friction. With these practices, teams can enjoy TeXmacs’ high-quality typesetting and semantic structure while maintaining efficient, conflict-minimizing collaborative workflows.
Leave a Reply