![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b3e1fe55d18e5a44aee43b25f7e7836c.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
"This is the project which has only 5 or 6 users. Who actually uses it? Use LaTeX!" That's the feeling I'm getting. I'm finding it hard to do a lot of basic things in Context. Maybe Context can do them and maybe it can't, but there is no way to find out. If the claims that Context is better really aren't empty, I would expect a lot of people to switch, but I imagine 99% of them are in the same boat I'm in---trying to switch and finding it practically impossible. I imagine many people try, spend a week trying to get it to work and then give up and go back to LaTeX. Mojca's point, that Context is commercial, may be the key: it can be free in name only but if the means of using it are kept secret, it's only of benefit to Pragma. (Hans himself mentioned earlier that there are many undocumented options for use in-house only that outsiders see in the code and wonder about.) Taco's objection that no one helps with the community project to update the reference manual is reasonable, but also predictable: strangers cannot simply wander in and write the book. The knowledge is in Hans's head (and maybe a few others), and only they can communicate it. It's evident that they either can't or won't. I really would like to see the quality of computer typesetting advance, and I was hopeful at hearing about Luatex/Context. I'd love to see Context produce better output more easily than LaTeX, but so far I'm putting a lot of effort into it to get some very disappointing results. One might place some hope in a future (21st c.?) LaTeX 3 based on Luatex, but that would depend on Hans explaining how Luatex works, and it seems doubtful that would ever happen. For now I'm sticking with Context because I still hope there might be some value in it, but it's hard to find.