%% LyX 2.3.6 created this file.  For more info, see http://www.lyx.org/.
%% Do not edit unless you really know what you are doing.
\documentclass[11pt,letterpaper,english]{extarticle}
\usepackage{lmodern}
\renewcommand{\sfdefault}{lmss}
\renewcommand{\ttdefault}{lmtt}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\setlength{\parskip}{\medskipamount}
\setlength{\parindent}{0pt}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{array}
\usepackage{float}
\usepackage{url}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[unicode=true,
 bookmarks=true,bookmarksnumbered=false,bookmarksopen=false,
 breaklinks=false,pdfborder={0 0 1},backref=false,colorlinks=false]
 {hyperref}
\hypersetup{pdftitle={stationery},
 pdfauthor={Paul E. Johnson},
 pdfsubject={reproducible documents}}

\makeatletter

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% LyX specific LaTeX commands.
\special{papersize=\the\paperwidth,\the\paperheight}

%% Because html converters don't know tabularnewline
\providecommand{\tabularnewline}{\\}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Textclass specific LaTeX commands.
<<echo=F>>=
  if(exists(".orig.enc")) options(encoding = .orig.enc)
@
\usepackage[natbibapa]{apacite}
\providecommand*{\code}[1]{\texttt{#1}}

\@ifundefined{date}{}{\date{}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% User specified LaTeX commands.
%\VignetteIndexEntry{stationery}
%\VignetteEngine{Sweave}
%\VignetteBuilder{stationery::rnw2pdf}
% Don't remove next commented line, its needed to fool Sweave
%\usepackage{Sweave}



\usepackage[includehead,includefoot,
lmargin=1in,
rmargin=1in,
tmargin=0.75in,
bmargin=1.0in,
headheight=0pt,
headsep=0pt,
marginparwidth=0pt,
footskip=1.5\baselineskip,
]{geometry}

\usepackage{dcolumn}
\usepackage{booktabs}


\input{theme/reportPreambleSweavel.tex}
\input{theme/reportPreambleHeader.tex}
\input{theme/preambleFooter.tex}



%Some eager users of APA6 style want this
%\usepackage[natbibapa]{apacite}
\renewcommand{\doiprefix}{doi:\kern-1pt}
\setlength{\bibsep}{10pt}

\@ifundefined{showcaptionsetup}{}{%
 \PassOptionsToPackage{caption=false}{subfig}}
\usepackage{subfig}
\makeatother

\usepackage{listings}
\renewcommand{\lstlistingname}{\inputencoding{latin9}Listing}

\begin{document}
\reportsetup{%
  author={
    lastname=Johnson,
    firstname=Paul E., 
    affiliation=Director{,}~CRMDA,
    email=pauljohn@ku.edu},
  title={stationery Package Overview: Guides, Slides, and Reports},
  rightlogo={theme/logo.pdf},
}
\reporthdr

<<include=FALSE,echo=FALSE, results=hide>>=
if(!dir.exists("tmpout"))dir.create("tmpout", recursive = TRUE)
@

% Please leave this code: In document Latex options:
\fvset{listparameters={\setlength{\topsep}{0em}}}
\SweaveOpts{prefix.string=tmpout/t, split=FALSE, ae=FALSE, height=5, width=6}

<<texcopy, include=FALSE,echo=FALSE,results=hide>>=
library(stationery)
## If theme directory does not have required images or TeX files
## we need to retrieve them and put them in "theme" directory. 
logos <- c(logoright = "logo.pdf", 
"addressFooter.tex", "preambleFooter.tex")
getFiles(logos, pkg = "stationery")
texfiles <- c("reportPreambleSweavel.tex", "reportPreambleHeader.tex", "preambleFooter.tex", "addressFooter.tex", "R.bib")
getFiles(texfiles, pkg = "stationery")
@

% Please leave this chunk
<<Roptions, echo=F, include=F, results=hide>>=
if(!dir.exists("tmpout"))dir.create("tmpout", recursive = TRUE)
opts.orig <- options()
options(device = pdf)
options(width=160, prompt=" ", continue="  ")
options(useFancyQuotes = FALSE) 
set.seed(12345)
par.orig <- par(no.readonly=TRUE) 
pjmar <- c(5.1, 5.1, 1.5, 2.1) 
options(SweaveHooks=list(fig=function() par(mar=pjmar, ps=10)))
@
\begin{abstract}
\noindent The stationery package offers working examples for preparation
of ``reproducible research'' documents. It demonstrates how one
can create and customize the style of both markdown and LaTeX documents.
These formats utilize R's ``code chunk'' processing technology,
so that code that creates figures and tables can be embedded into
the document itself. The package includes 8 document templates. The
vignettes that accompany the package provide elementary explanations
of the formats and how they differ in practice.
\end{abstract}

\section{Introduction}

``Reproducible research documents?'' A university administrator
recently exclaimed, ``I have no idea what that means!'' Many members
of the faculty seem to have the same response. The \code{stationery}
package for R is here to help. It offers working examples that new
users may explore to find out what works.

The big idea of the \emph{reproducible research documents} movement
(\citealp{leisch2002}; \citealp{stodden_implementing_2014}; \citealp{xie_dynamic_2015},
\citeyear{xie_bookdown:_2016}) is to replace traditional ``cut and
paste'' research reports with a program-driven documentation system
that blends calculations with report preparation. Researchers who
use word processors have long been aware of the danger that computer
code and output tables fall into misalignment. Hand edited tables
are often incorrect, misplacing decimal points and parameter names.
Proponents of reproducible documents ask us to change our workflow
in a fundamental way. 

In my experience, the benefits of this new approach are especially
notable in class notes, slides, and small to medium sized reports.
A chronic problem for teachers is a misalignment of computer code
and output in course materials. It is easy to forget to paste in an
updated graph or modify a table. With a reproducible document, there
is less danger that the computer code being discussed will not match
the output. 

In the \emph{new way} of doing things, we avoid typing tables or pasting
in graphs. The analysis software will prepare article-ready tables
and graphs that can be put to use with no (or almost no) revision.
In the ideal case, an entire article, lecture, or book can be generated
in one single execution that conducts analysis, saves graphics, and
assembles them together in the output document. This is in line with
the ``literate programming'' movement started by computer scientist
Donald Knuth (\citeyear{knuth_literate_1984}, \citeyear{knuth_texbook_1984}),
who also created the TeX document preparation system. The statistical
program R \citep{RCore} built its documentation framework on the
literate programming philosophy, integrating Knuth's concepts of ``weaving''
and ``tangling'' into the R system for creating documentation \citep{leisch2002}. 

For most word-processor-using researchers, the transition will be
jarring. First, the tools for statistical analysis (e.g., SAS, SPSS,
Stata, or Mplus) that used to seem adequate are to be replaced with
statistical software that is more readily integrated with document
preparation. Second, the software for document authoring is being
replaced. Microsoft Word is, simply put, insufficient. There is new
priority on the integration of code and output within documents. 

Once we understand that \emph{big idea}, then comes another series
of rude shocks. First, \emph{there are several competing formats }for
creating reproducible documents. The first examples prepared for this
package were done with LaTeX in mind, but we have introduced a set
of examples based on R markdown as well. The examples include code
for ``raw'' LaTeX and LyX (a graphical interface for LaTeX document
preparation, \url{http://www.lyx.org}). 

Markdown document formats are, at least superficially, simpler. Their
content may seem less obscured by formatting code. For example, in
LaTeX to insert a bold font, one would write

\code{\textbackslash textbf\{this is bold\}}, but in most dialects
of markdown, a simpler \code{{*}{*}this is bold{*}{*}} would get
the job done. Markdown is a reasonably legible format \emph{as is},
and yet it can be compiled into more professional output formats.
The leading voice for markdown has been John Gruber, whose Daring
Fireball website (https://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown) offered
the first working set of guidelines for markdown documents. Markdown
is more like a movement than language, since there are many competing
versions (called ``flavors'') of the language specification. The
success of markdown depends, in a very practical way, on the success
of John MacFarlane's ambitious software program \code{pandoc} \citep{MacFarlane},
a translator and compiler.

In my experience, it is relatively easy to build a simple document
with either LaTeX or markdown. It is considerably more difficult to
create a nice-looking document that incorporates the special features
that we are used to in reports. And it is considerably more difficult
to re-style the output to match user-driven specifications. The \code{stationery}
package reflects the accumulated effort (and frustration) of several
generations of graduate research assistants who have struggled to
reconcile the reproducible document idea into demands of an organization
that wants to issue visually consistent guides and reports.\footnote{Special thanks to Brent Kaplan, Ben Kite, and Charles Redmon.}
Others who want to create their own distinctive styles can take the
offerings here as evidence that there is light at the end of the tunnel. 

Before proceeding to the discussion of the package, some key terms
should be well understood.
\begin{description}
\item [{front~end:}] the format in which a document is prepared. Markdown
files are saved with a suffix \code{.Rmd}, while the LaTeX files
that include code chunks are saved as \code{.Rnw}. LyX is an editor
that saves its files with the suffix \code{.lyx}, but can export
to \code{.Rnw}.
\item [{back~end:}] the delivered format.\footnote{In this context, it is a bit vague to say \emph{front end} because
each document is converted through several formats in the compilation
process. Any intermediate format that precedes another might be edited
directly and treated as a front end by an author.} The back ends considered here are Adobe portable document format
(PDF) and hypertext markup language (HTML). 
\item [{code~chunk:}] A segment of computer code (usually R code) that
is embedded in a LaTeX or markdown document.
\item [{style:}] the description of the back end's layout and format. Our
examples include pedagogical guides, formal reports, and slides.
\item [{skeleton:}] a minimum working example that an author can revise
into an essay.
\item [{weave:}] to replace code chunks with output, preparing for compilation
of a report (synonym of ``knit'').
\item [{tangle:}] to extract code chunks into a free standing computer
program (synonym of ``purl'').
\end{description}

\section{What Do You Get with stationery?}

The \code{stationery} package includes examples for eight types of
documents (see Table \ref{tab:Document-Types}). The document types
``mix and match'' front ends, back ends, and document styles. We
hope that authors who are accustomed to writing on stationery, with
a pleasant header and footer, will find satisfactory results. Each
document style includes theme files. While it is not easy to create
these style templates, we believe it will be easier for others succeed
if they start from the examples we offer. 

The package provides R functions to initialize skeleton documents
and convert them to a desired back end. It also provides a shell script
with each document type that can be used to compile documents from
the command line.

Finally, there are vignettes. In addition to the current document,
there are vignettes named
\begin{enumerate}
\item Code Chunks, which compares Sweave and knitr style code chunks,
\item R markdown, which explores key elements in the newest front end, and
\item HTML Special Features, a tour of the promise and peril of using HTML
as a back end for markdown documents.
\end{enumerate}

\subsection{\protect\code{stationery} package document templates}

In Table \ref{tab:Document-Types}, readers will note that the document
formats have three-part names like ``\code{rnw2pdf-guide-sweave}''.
The first part of the name has the format \emph{frontend}2\emph{backend.}
The ``rnw'' prefix is for LaTeX files (suffixes to be explained
below) and the ``pdf'' is the output type. The middle part of the
format label is either ``guide'', ``report'' or ``slides''.
For document types that can be used with either \code{Sweave} or
\code{knitr} code chunks, it is necessary to add a third part in
the name (R markdown documents cannot use the \code{Sweave} engine). 

\begin{table}
\caption{Document Types in Stationery\label{tab:Document-Types}}

\begin{tabular}{ccccc>{\centering}p{1in}}
\hline 
 & Formats & Frontend & Backend & Style & Code Chunk Engine\tabularnewline
\hline 
1 & rmd2html-guide & Markdown & HTML & Guide & knitr\tabularnewline
2 & rmd2pdf-guide & Markdown & PDF & Guide & knitr\tabularnewline
3 &  rmd2pdf-report & Markdown & PDF & Report & knitr\tabularnewline
4 & rnw2pdf-guide-knit & Markdown & PDF & Guide & knitr\tabularnewline
5 & rnw2pdf-guide-sweave & LaTeX/LyX & PDF & Guide & Sweave\tabularnewline
6 & rnw2pdf-report-knit & LaTeX/LyX & PDF & Report & knitr\tabularnewline
7 & rnw2pdf-report-sweave & LaTeX/LyX & PDF & Report & Sweave\tabularnewline
8 & rnw2pdf-slides-sweave & LaTeX/LyX & PDF & Slides & Sweave\tabularnewline
\hline 
\end{tabular}
\end{table}

\begin{figure}
\caption{Compiling a Reproducible Research Document\label{fig:Compiling}}

\includegraphics[width=5in]{importfigs/docproc-01}
\end{figure}

The process of converting a reproducible document from front end to
back end is referred to as \emph{compiling}. As illustrated in Figure
\ref{fig:Compiling}, it is a multi-step process. Because the process
can fail at any step, users are well advised to keep this fact in
mind. There will be flaws in documents that can only be discerned
by inspecting each stage in the process.

Between the front end and the back end intermediate files are created
(and just as quickly erased). One of the current aims in software
development is to make the transition process automatic and seamless,
but errors at each stage are still fairly common. One challenge is
to retain some flexibility for user input while weeding out compilation
errors.

LaTeX authors are used to editing .tex files, but \code{.tex} is
usually an intermediate format in this work. When code chunks are
inserted in a LaTeX file, the document is referred to as a ``noweb''
file and the filename suffix is \code{.Rnw}. That file is converted
into a \code{.tex} file by the chunk converter. (If one is editing
a \code{LyX} file, the converter will export to \code{.Rnw} as a
first step.) The intermediate LaTeX files will be compiled, usually
by \code{pdflatex} or \code{texi2pdf}. An R markdown document, which
has the suffix \code{.Rmd}, can be prepared with various back ends
in mind (we concentrate on PDF and HTML back ends.) 

One meaningful difference between LaTeX-based documents and markdown-based
documents is customization of document features in the compilation
process. \code{pdflatex} and \code{texi2pdf} do not provide command-line
options to change the look-and-feel of a document, while \code{pandoc}
does. If one has created tens or 100s of documents, the ability to
re-style them in a script, rather than revising each of the individual
documents, is a major advantage. This will be discussed further in
section \ref{subsec:How-to-Compile}.

\subsection{Incorporating computer code}

Whether one is editing in a LaTeX or a markdown file, there will be
code chunks. In markdown documents, code chunks are bracketed by tick
marks:

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
```{r chunkname, options}
code here
```
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
In LaTeX documents, code chunks are represented differently:

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}[language=C]
 <<chunkname, options>>=
 code here
 @
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
One of the pivotal stages in document compilation is the conversion
of code chunks into formats suitable for inclusion in the document.
At this point, we arrive at a somewhat unhappy situation because there
are competing programs and terminology. Knuth referred to the chunk
conversion process as ``weaving''. The base R framework refers to
chunk conversion as ``Sweaving'' (because S was the precursor to
R; \citet{leisch2002}). The newer \code{knitr}\citep{xie_knitr}
package for R refers to the chunk-conversion process as ``knitting'',
although it is doing the same work as Sweaving. Another problem in
terminology is that Knuth used the unlikely term ``tangle'' to refer
to extraction of code chunks to create a ``free standing'' program
(a program document separate from the commentary about it). Base R
refers to that by the name ``Stangle'' while \code{knitr} package
calls it ``purling''. 

In LaTeX documents, computer code can be displayed in various ways.
The traditional method was the LaTeX environment \code{Verbatim},
but a more flexible alternative is the \code{Listings} package. Our
PDF documents use the \code{Listings} class. Our style documents
include example settings that authors can revise if they want to adjust
the shading, line numbering, or other characteristics. 

\section{Quick Start}

\subsection{Create a starter \textquotedblleft skeleton\textquotedblright{} document}

The stationery package provides \code{initWriteup}, a function to
create simple ready-to-compile examples. Here we will illustrate creation
of an R markdown guide that will have a HTML back end. Start R in
a folder where you would like to create a write-up and run

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
library(stationery)
initWriteup(type = "rmd2pdf-report")
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
This creates a folder named \code{rmd2pdf-report} in which one should
find 
\begin{enumerate}
\item a skeleton template, \code{skeleton.Rmd},
\item an instructional guide, \code{instructions.Rmd},
\item a compiler script, \code{rmd2pdf.sh},
\item a subdirectory \code{theme}, in which a template and some other configuration
files are to be copied.
\end{enumerate}
The return from \code{initWriteup} will indicate the full path to
the new directory:

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}[style=Routput]
[1] "/home/pauljohn/wherever_you_say/rmd2pdf-report"
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
Most users will rename \code{skeleton.Rmd} to something more suitable.
Here we discuss an example named \code{crmda.Rmd}.

There are other ways to create a document. We have formatted the folder
structure of the package in a way that is consistent with the template
format required by RStudio (http://www.rstudio.com), as specified
by the package \code{rmarkdown}; \citealp{Allaire_rmarkdown}). For
markdown-based formats (sadly, not for the LaTeX based formats), the
RStudio graphical interface will work well. A user can open the File
menu, choose New File -> R Markdown -> From Template. The formats
``rmd2html guide'', ``rmd2pdf report'' and ``rmd2pdf guide''
should be available. 

The \code{rmarkdown} function \code{draft()} performs exactly the
same purpose. One could run

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
library(rmarkdown)
draft("crmda.Rmd", template = "rmd2pdf-report", package = "stationery", create_dir = FALSE)
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
Perhaps confusingly, the term template is used in different ways.
The \code{rmarkdown::draft} function uses the name \code{template}
to refer to larger collection of settings and document resources,
while the same name is used by \code{pandoc} to refer only to particular
file within the larger scheme. The \code{rmd2pdf-report} document
skeleton, for example, specifies a template file in the document preamble: 

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
template: "theme/report-template.tex"
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}

\subsection{How to Compile a Document\label{subsec:How-to-Compile}}

While editing a document, authors are well advised to heed the advice:
\begin{quote}
Compile early, compile often!
\end{quote}
Users should try to compile our document before changing it. While
revising the document, it is wise to compile often and notice errors
as soon as they are committed.

The file can be compiled in several ways. 
\begin{enumerate}
\item Use shell commands

For the sake of completeness, we begin with the most basic method:
run commands in a terminal. For a LaTeX file, such as \code{crmda.Rnw},
this is straightforward. First, convert the code chunks to R input:

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
$ R CMD Sweave crmda.Rnw
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
That creates \code{crmda.tex}, which is then converted to PDF output: 

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
$ texi2pdf crmda.tex
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
The command line options to compile a file with \code{knitr} code
chunks is a bit more elaborate. I generally use the R functions or
shell scripts described next. 
\item Open an R session and use the functions \code{rmd2pdf()}, \code{rmd2html()},
and \code{rnw2pdf()} in the \code{stationery} package. 

These functions will compile files that are saved in the \code{.lyx},
\code{.Rnw}, and \code{.Rmd} formats. For example, 

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}[style=Rinput]
library(stationery)
rmd2pdf("crmda.Rmd")
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
This orchestrates a two-part process that involves functions in the
\code{rmarkdown} and \code{knitr} packages. The document header
is scanned and then a suitable document format object is created.
The heavy lifting is done by the \code{pdf\_document} or \code{html\_document}
functions in the \code{rmarkdown} package. The code chunks in the
.Rmd file will be converted to output chunks in an intermediate file
named \code{crmda.utf8.md}. After that, intermediate documents must
be rendered to the final result. The benefit of using the \code{stationery}
functions is that they will review the in-document format settings,
but can override them with function parameters. For example, one can
control the creation of a table of contents by including \code{toc: true}
in the \code{.Rmd} document, or by running \code{pdf\_document}
with the parameter \code{toc = TRUE}. Any of the document parameters
can be selectively replaced. 

As a use case, suppose we write three R markdown documents and we
forget to specify the depth of the table of contents. Rather than
editing each individual document to insert \code{toc\_depth:1}, we
might instead specify the depth as an R function argument:

<<usage110, eval=F>>=
rmd2pdf(c("crmda1.Rmd", "crmda2.Rmd", "crmda3.Rmd"), toc = TRUE, toc_depth = 1)
@

Similarly, a template can be substituted by employing the template
argument, such as \code{template = \textquotedbl theme/report-newtemplate.tex\textquotedbl}.

There are differences in format between the values in the markdown
document preamble and the R function call. R uses \code{TRUE} , \code{FALSE}
and \code{NULL} where markdown uses lower case \code{true} , \code{false},
and \code{null}.
\item Run the shell script provided with the template.

The document skeleton is provided with a compiler script. It can do
the same work as \code{rmd2pdf} inside R. 

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
$ ./rmd2pdf.sh crmda.Rmd
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
The compiler script is designed to accept the same arguments as the
function \code{rmd2pdf}, but in the command line it is a little tricky
to specify the options because character variables require quotation
marks, and quotation marks need to be protected from interpretation
by the shell. Here we protect double quotes in single quotes:

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
$ ./rmd2pdf.sh --template='"theme/report-newtemplate.tex"' --toc=TRUE --toc_depth=1 crmda.Rmd
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
We have made special effort to implement GNU style two-dash command
line arguments (spaces are not allowed on either side of the equal
sign).
\item Our LaTeX skeletons are provided with both \code{.lyx} and \code{.Rnw}
files. The \code{.lyx} file can be opened with LyX. Compilation to
PDF (via pdflatex) will be handled automatically by LyX. The LyX document
has internal settings which indicate whether the code chunks will
be handled by \code{Sweave} or \code{knitr}. LyX files can also
be handled by the function \code{rnw2pdf} and the shell script of
the same name.
\item If editing in \code{RStudio}, there is a button \includegraphics[width=1.5cm]{importfigs/RStudio-knit}
that has a small triangular widget. This should be used with \emph{extreme
caution} because it can alter the document preamble. 

In the preamble of the markdown document, there will be an output
stanza. Our skeleton for \code{rmd2pdf} guide documents includes
the following.

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
output: 
  pdf_document:
    citation_package: natbib
    fig_caption: yes
    latex_engine: pdflatex
    highlight: haddock
    pandoc_args: [
        --listings
    ]
    template:  theme/guide-template.tex
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
The \code{RStudio} Knit triangular widget offers a selection of document
back ends. Be careful to choose ``Knit to PDF''. If the user makes
a mistake and selects, say, ``Knit to HTML'', then \code{RStudio}
will replace the output stanza in the document. It will insert its
best guesses about settings for \code{html\_document}. When \code{RStudio}
inserts its best guess, it sometimes corrupts the format of the other
output types and the document will fail to compile. 

In our \code{rmd2html} documents, the output format is controlled
by a function in \code{stationery} called \code{crmda\_html\_document}
. 

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
output:
  stationery::crmda_html_document:
    toc: true
    toc_depth: 2
    highlight: haddock
    theme: default
    citation_package: natbib
    css: theme/kutils.css
    template: theme/guide-template.html
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
New versions of \code{RStudio} will notice that output format and
offer a choice ``Knit to crmda\_html\_document''. 

RStudio is also able to edit .Rnw files, but its File -> New setup
is not customized for LaTeX files. Authors will need to create the
new document in one of the ways mentioned above before editing it
in RStudio.
\end{enumerate}

\section{Styling for Documents}

\subsection{Reports versus Guides}

The \code{stationery} package document templates are intended to
have consistent ``look and feel'' across document types. Reports
created with markdown or LaTeX should look the same. Results created
by documents using either Sweave or knitr for chunk processing should
have a similar appearance. To the extent possible, the color schemes
and arrangement of header and footer information should be similar
(if not identical). 

The stationery package includes two document styles, dubbed ``guide''
and ``report''. The difference between these two is not hard-and-fast.
A \textbf{guide} is usually prepared as a teaching document. It may
end up in a Webpage, where more color rather than less is expected.
It is usually a less formal document. The final presentation is likely
to include computer code and output excerpts. The header is a three
column structure with organizational and/or departmental logos on
either side (see Figure \ref{fig:Markdown-Output} for an example). 

A \textbf{report} is a more formal document. Its first page includes
a header and a footer with organizational address information (see
Figure \ref{fig:Latex-Report}). The header and footer appear only
on the first page. It is more is suitable for preparation of a report
to clients or a draft of a journal article. A report typically has
less (maybe no) code and almost never will it include \textquotedbl raw
output\textquotedbl{} from a computer program. A report includes tables
and figures that are in a (nearly) publishable format. This document
is prepared with the report template, but we do have some ``raw''
code examples.

The slide format is based on LaTeX Beamer \citep{Tantau2016} slide
format using a customized theme that features the colors of our institution.
Our slides use the Sweave engine. We have experimented with many slide
producing strategies using markdown code and none of them have been
dependable, so we set that aside for the moment.

\subsection{Distinctive Headers and Footers}

In the \code{stationery} package, we provide enhanced headers (and
footers where appropriate) that incorporate organizational graphics
and address information. Document templates are provided for that
purpose. 

\begin{figure}

\caption{Latex Output (Report Document)\label{fig:Latex-Report}}

\subfloat[Header]{

\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{importfigs/rnw2pdf-report-header}}

\subfloat[Footer]{

\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{importfigs/rnw2pdf-report-footer}

}

\end{figure}

The markdown format introduced some interesting concepts to streamline
document creation, so we begin with a markdown document's preamble.
As exemplified in Listing \ref{lis:markdown1}, the markdown document
begins with a section, written in YAML format, that species the title.
A standard set of parameters is specified by \code{pandoc}, but additional
parameters can be provided by our template and also by the R functions
that compile the document. In this case, the parameters like \code{affiliation},
\code{email}, \code{l1} through \code{r3}, and the logo image files,
are specified by our template. Many additional details about working
with markdown are spelled out in the \code{stationery} vignette ``R
markdown Basics.'' The header and footer created from the document
are presented in Figure \ref{fig:Markdown-Output}.

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}[float=ht,caption={Beginning of a markdown preamble},label={lis:markdown1},captionpos=t]
---
title: "A Title for Template"
subtitle: "rmd2pdf-guide"
guidenum: 00
guideurl: https://crmda.dept.ku.edu/guides/
keywords: R markdown, R, documents
author:
- name: First Author
  affiliation: CRMDA
  email: first@ku.edu
- name:  Second Author
  affiliation: CRMDA
  email: second@ku.edu
addr:
    l1: address row 1
    l2: address row 2
    l3: City State Zipcode
    r1: "Web: http://crmda.dept.ku.edu"
    r2: "Email: author@ku.edu"
    r3: "Phone: 123-345-5678"
logoleft: theme/logoleft.pdf
logoright: theme/logo-vert.pdf
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
\begin{figure}[H]

\caption{Markdown Output (Guide Document) \label{fig:Markdown-Output}}

\subfloat[Header]{

\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{importfigs/rmd2pdf-header}}

\subfloat[Footer]{

\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{importfigs/rmd2pdf-footer}

}
\end{figure}

One of the benefits of the markdown preamble is that one can specify
a authors in a flexible way, providing one or more names that are
gracefully handled during the rendering process.

In LaTeX, the tools to specify title and author information are not
as flexible. The problem is solved by some LaTeX functions in our
templates. These use recent innovations in the LaTeX programming interface.
(Packages consistent with TexLive 2016 or newer will be required).
The top portion of the LaTeX document, where we expect the author
to include the metadata, is illustrated in Listing \ref{lis:latex1}.
The input format is similar to the markdown format, but there are
slight differences due to inherent differences in technology. However,
the output is the same (see Figure \ref{fig:LaTeX-Output}). The LaTeX
format allows us to keep the footer information–the address–in a separate
file, so it need not be typed into each individual document (markdown
does not allow that). 

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}[float=h,caption={LaTeX header information},label={lis:latex1},captionpos={t}]
\guidesetup{
  author={
    lastname=Author, 
    firstname=First, 
    affiliation=CRMDA,
    email=first@ku.edu},
  author={
    lastname=Author, 
    firstname=Second, 
    affiliation=CRMDA, 
    email=second@ku.edu}, 
  url={https://crmda.dept.ku.edu/guides/},
  keywords={single-authoring, just one},
  title={A Title for Skeleton Template: rnw2pdf-guide-sweave},
  leftlogo={theme/logoleft.pdf},
  rightlogo={theme/logo-vert.pdf},
  number=00,
}
\guidehdr
%footer information in theme/addressFooter.tex
\footersetup{
  leftside={
    lone={Address line 1}, 
    ltwo={Address line 2}, 
    lthree={City State Zipcode}},
  rightside={
    rone=Web: \url{https://crmda.dept.ku.edu},
    rtwo=Email: \href{mailto:you@where.edu}{\url{you@where.edu}},
    rthree=Phone: 123-345-5678}
}
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
\begin{figure}[h]
\caption{LaTeX Output (Guide Document) \label{fig:LaTeX-Output}}

\subfloat[Header]{

\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{importfigs/rnw2pdf-guide-header}}

\subfloat[Footer]{

\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{importfigs/rnw2pdf-guide-footer}}
\end{figure}


\subsection{Customization}

Hopefully, authors do not have too much trouble filling in their names
and titles. There are not too many ``gotchas'', but the use of illegal
symbols for the intended back end may cause trouble. For example,
LaTeX documents assign special meaning to symbols like ``\%'', ``\$'',
and ``\_'' and these will need to be protected by a backslash. In
documents intended for HTML, titles or author names that include reserved
symbols such as ``<'' ,''>'', or ``\&'' are likely to cause
trouble and should be avoided. 

As the example code illustrates, we assume the logo information is
saved in files with names like ``\code{theme/logoleft.pdf}''. Before
first compiling our document, the author can copy image files into
the theme directory to replace our defaults. If the author does not
do so, the document compiler will retrieve the ``plain white'' image
defaults and place them in the theme directory. Within the document,
look for a code chunk like this which retrieves logo files. 

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
```{r themecopy, include = FALSE}
library(stationery)
logos <- c(logoleft = "logoleft.pdf", logoright = "logo-vert.pdf")
getFiles(logos, pkg = "stationery")
```
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
If authors expect to create many documents, it is possible to automate
this process. One can create an R package to hold the logo information
(we can supply a working example of a package named ``\code{crmda}'').
To pull logo information from the user's package, one will replace
our \code{pkg = \textquotedbl stationery\textquotedbl} with \code{pkg = \textquotedbl your\_pkg\_name\textquotedbl}. 

\subsection{HTML themes and the file size problem}

The output size of HTML files may be quite large, even if the document
itself has almost no content. This problem arises because \code{rmarkdown}
uses a theme set based on the bootstrap library \citep{bootstrap}.
If the markdown preamble does not specify a theme, or it specifies
any theme except \code{null}, then a large amount of javascript and
cascading style sheet data from bootstrap is inserted into the HTML
header. This can take up to 700KB of storage. All of the other elements
in the document, including its graphs and features, will take additional
space. An R package that includes three HTML vignettes will exceed
the CRAN limit on the size of packages. 

Rather than editing the document over-and-over to see the effects
of themes, we suggest instead either using the The \code{stationery}
package document template are intended to have consistent ``look
and feel'' across formats. A guide document may be produced with
an HTML back end, or in PDF, with either Sweave or knitr chunk processing
engines. The same is true for report documents produced by Sweave
and knitr. function or the x script. To prevent the use of a Bootstrap
library theme, the \code{rmd2html} function can be run like so.

<<eval=F>>=
rmd2html("crmda.Rmd", theme=NULL)
@

On the command line, the parameter value NULL should not be quoted:

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
$ ./rmd2html.sh --theme=NULL crmda.Rmd
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
The nearly empty \code{skeleton.Rmd} provided with this package has
a compiled size will be around 700KB. Preventing the insertion of
the Bootstrap-based theme will reduce the HTML output file size to
62KB. (Note the author can insert ``theme: null'' in the markdown
to prevent the use of a bootstrap theme (note that \code{null} is
neither capitalized nor quoted). Of course, the disadvantage of removing
the theme is that the benefits of the theme are lost. In the \code{stationery}
package, there is a vignette ``HTML Special Features,'' that explores
these issues.

It is worth mentioning that there are many bootstrap themes (they
are listed in the help page for \code{rmarkdown::html\_document}).
One can explore the impact of these themes on the final document by
running, for example, 

<<eval=F>>=
rmd2html("crmda.Rmd", theme = "spacelab")
@

or, from the command line,

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
$ ./rmd2html.sh --theme='"spacelab"' crmda.Rmd
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}

\subsection{Troubleshooting}

Documents often fail to compile. There are many failure points and
one might need to inspect the intermediate files and output at several
stages. When there is trouble, recompile with parameter values \code{clean = FALSE},
\code{quiet = FALSE}, and either \code{keep\_md = TRUE} (for HTML
output) or \code{keep\_tex = TRUE} (for PDF). By inspecting the intermediate
files, editing them, and running the compiler commands again, one
can usually find out what's wrong. During this process, it is beneficial
to remember that the rendering process has separate stages, and each
one can be run in isolation.

When \code{quiet = FALSE}, one of the especially important parts
of the verbose output is the full command that is sent to \code{pandoc}.
For example, compiling our minimal skeleton \code{crmda.Rmd} yields
this intimidating list of command line options

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}[basicstyle={\footnotesize},breaklines=true,tabsize=2]
/usr/bin/pandoc +RTS -K512m -RTS crmda.utf8.md --to html4 --from markdown+autolink_bare_uris+ascii_identifiers+tex_math_single_backslash --output crmda.html --smart --email-obfuscation none --self-contained --standalone --section-divs --table-of-contents --toc-depth 2 --template theme/guide-template.html --highlight-style haddock --css theme/kutils.css --variable 'theme:bootstrap' --include-in-header /tmp/RtmpU3qSFQ/R markdown-str33e24223b3a.html --mathjax --variable 'mathjax-url:https://mathjax.RStudio.com/latest/MathJax.js?config=TeX-AMS-MML_HTMLorMML' --filter /usr/bin/pandoc-citeproc
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
This converts an intermediate markdown document \code{crmda.utf8.md}
into \code{crmda.html}. The help page for pandoc lists the document
parameters than can be specified in the command line (such as \code{-{}-template}
or \code{-{}-table-of-contents}.

\section{Choosing among formats}

We provide 8 document formats because there are several acceptable
methods. Each one has strengths and weaknesses. At the current time,
there is a considerable amount of enthusiasm about markdown. The markdown
movement is the ``bleeding edge,'' literally, as the style for document
markup and the development of software to convert documents into the
final format is currently underway. The core program that handles
markdown documents, \code{pandoc}, is undergoing rapid development.\footnote{Frequent changes in \code{pandoc} caused the RStudio program distribution
to include a snapshot of \code{pandoc} so that their example documents
can be compiled in a predictable way. We are warned that our templates
for \code{pandoc} are likely to be made unworkable by revisions in
the future and revisions will be necessary.} On the other hand, the LaTeX-based approaches are time-tested and
the compilers for them have existed for years. There are fewer surprises
(bugs), but there are more details for authors to learn.

A long run goal in the development of markdown is to create a single
document that can be compiled into various formats. At the current
time, that is an \emph{aspiration}, not a reality. Authors who prepare
documents intended for one format will generally use features that
are fundamentally incompatible with the other formats. As a result,
the choice of the back end must be made first, and after that one
can choose among features in the front end that are compatible with
the desired result. Where you want to end up determines where you
start.

To sort through these considerations, the right place to start is
the end. After we figure out the end, we can concentrate on the beginning.

\subsection{Which back end?}

Should I end up with HTML or PDF? The answer depends on the intended
audience/client. If a \textquotedbl paper\textquotedbl{} must be
submitted, choose PDF. If the document needs numbered equations, cross
references, and \textquotedbl floating\textquotedbl{} tables and
figures, choose PDF. If the document is intended for a Webpage, then
choose HTML (although we prefer to PDF document via the Web in many
cases). 

HTML documents have hidden benefits and hidden costs. There is no
free lunch. One can have features, but at the cost of large file sizes
and (sometimes) unpredictable user experiences. Web browsers differ
in their implementation of guidelines, javascript, and cascading style
sheets. If one intends to convey a document in a replicable way to
a wide audience using various kinds of computers, then PDF is the
recommended format. The equations and figures are ``in'' the document
and the author can be confident that they will have the same appearance
across systems.

There are other limitations in HTML. There is no built-in method for
display of mathematical equations. There have been efforts to ameliorate
that problem over the years, the most recent of which is called MathJax
(\url{http://www.mathjax.org}). MathJax is a Web program that can
be called when a user opens an HTML document. MathJax displays markup
in a way that is similar to LaTeX output. However, in order for this
to work, the conditions must be ``just right''. First, if the remote
server that provides MathJax is unavailable, then the math in the
document will not be rendered. Second, some special care is required
to allow MathJax equations in HTML documents that are based on markdown
templates. The stationery package includes a special document format
function, \code{crmda\_html\_document}, that circumvents the limitations.

\subsection{What do the front end formats have in common?}

First, each one offers a method to include R code chunks. The formats
and options differ, but the functionality is similar. 

Second, all of these formats allow authors to include LaTeX expressions
for math. Much, but not all, LaTeX code will work in either format.
Inline and display equations can work well in either, while many of
the attendant features (numbered equations, cross references) are
not available when the back end is HTML.

Third, one can freely use ``native'' code that is suitable for back
end. In a markdown document for which the back end is HTML, one can
insert HTML code. It will be passed through without alteration to
the back end in most cases. If the back end is PDF (via pdflatex),
any legal LaTeX code can be inserted in a markdown document. To an
considerable degree, this solves the problem that ``there is no markdown
for that.'' R functions that can write output in LaTeX or HTML format
can be exploited in this way. There is no need to write a new function
to create regression tables. One can shop among the alternatives,
knowing only that the output format must be suited to the back end.

Nevertheless, the inclusion of native code in a markdown document
is viewed as something of a defeat. Markdown enthusiasts would be
more enthusiastic if we would either 1) live within the limitations
of their framework, or 2) do the work to broaden the framework itself.
For the first few years after markdown was introduced, it was possible
to insert graphics in the document, but it was not possible to resize
their display width or height in markdown code. To work around that,
we inserted native HTML code to resize graphics. Several years later
\code{pandoc} markdown introduced parameters to resize markdown images.

\subsection{What considerations differentiate the front ends?}

The original version of this document was prepared in R markdown that
was compiled into HTML. There were several show-stopping flaws. Some
features failed to compile, and some errors in my own code were silently
ignored by the version of \code{pandoc} that was available in 2017.
The document was changed to LaTeX and PDF. When the back end format
changed to PDF, several special features of the HTML back end had
to be removed. (Again, there is no free lunch.)

I believe the following are reasonable conclusions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If one intends to export as HTML, then markdown is, \emph{by far},
the most reasonable choice for a front end. Markdown was developed,
first and foremost, as a simpler way to generate Web pages. There
are special features in the HTML back end that can only be exploited
in markdown documents. There are always some proponents of LaTeX that
would have us convert to HTML, but none of the suggested avenues preserve
equations and tables (in my experience) as well as markdown to HTML
conversion. 
\item If one intends to export to PDF, then either markdown or LaTeX can
be useful. But  LaTeX  is probably better.  LaTeX  is primarily intended
for the creation of publication-quality documents in PDF format. While
it is true that markdown documents can benefit from insertion of LaTeX
equations and some structures, they lack the ability to exploit many
of the strengths in LaTeX document preparation.
\end{enumerate}
Another concern is that R markdown implies an ``extra step'' in
the compilation process. \code{.Rmd} is knitted into \code{.md},
which then must be converted to \code{.tex}, from which PDF is created.
In contrast, a document prepared in \code{.Rnw} format will be converted
straight to \code{.tex}. The ``extra step'' of translation (from
\code{.md} to \code{.tex}) is avoided in LaTeX.

The fact of life, at least at the current time, is that it is not
painless to change the output format without making wholesale changes
in the document front end. If one writes a markdown document, using
special features intended for the back end, then it is generally not
possible to, at the last minute, change the output format. HTML output
has advantages in Web style features, while PDF documents have advantages
in \textquotedbl on paper\textquotedbl{} presentations.

\subsection{Where does my editor fit into this?}

We need an editor that allows the insertion of code chunks and has
the ability to compile documents (recall Figure \ref{fig:Compiling}).
Microsoft Word is not a workable alternative. One must either use
a general purpose programmer's file editor and then compile the document
using the R functions or command line scripts outlined above, or one
may use an integrated development environment. 

I recommend LyX (http://www.lyx.org) to many LaTeX learners. It is
a graphical interface for preparation of LaTeX documents. LyX can
export LaTeX files and it offers some good tools to learn about how
to write LaTeX. LyX was used to create the skeletons provided with
\code{stationery}. We prepare the documents as \code{.lyx} files,
and then export to an equivalent \code{.Rnw} file. 

LyX offers many benefits, but it has one limitation (which all LaTeX
editors will share). LyX allows us to enter code chunks in the document,
but it does not offer a convenient way to test chunks interactively.
Rather, one must compile the whole document. I recommend running LyX
from a terminal so that the R error messages will be easy to review,
but that is only a modicum of relief. If one is editing in LyX (or
in a LaTeX editor) and saves a file, the shell script rnw2pdf.sh will
be able to compile the file. It will execute a sequence of steps roughly
as follows:

\inputencoding{latin9}\begin{lstlisting}
$ lyx -e sweave stationery.lyx # creates a Rnw file
$ R CMD Sweave stationery.Rnw # creates a tex file
$ texi2pdf stationery.tex # creates pdf, could use pdflatex
\end{lstlisting}
\inputencoding{utf8}
When this succeeds, the result is fine, but when it fails, finding
errors can be difficult. Compiling the LaTeX or LyX document has an
``all or nothing'' feel. One can edit an \code{.Rnw} file in any
editor intended for LaTeX, of course, but those editors will have
the same limitation that one cannot test R code chunks interactively.

As an alternative workflow, one can instead edit the \code{.Rnw}
or \code{.Rmd} files with editors have an ``inferior mode'' that
can start an interactive R session. The author can create a code chunk
and test it interactively before trying to compile the whole document.
There are several editors that have that ability. The venerable editor
Emacs (\url{http://emacs.org}) offers Emacs Speaks Statistics (ESS;
\url{https://ess.r-project.org}) which is popular with experts for
a number of reasons. Perceiving Emacs to be difficult to use, many
novices enjoy RStudio, which has the ability to work with markdown
or LaTeX files. Neither Emacs nor RStudio make the creation of LaTeX
markup especially easy, however.

While working on the markdown documents in this package, we are struck
by the fact that markdown is a movement, a \emph{frame of mind}, rather
than a product. It is a rapidly moving target with several competing
sets of idioms. Features are added and changed on a weekly basis.
That is to say, we are on the steeply sloped curve of technical innovation.

I extend an apology and salute to users of Emacs Org mode, which is
an entirely different implementation of the same ideas as markdown
(Org existed first). Org mode has a document header that is very similar
to markdown, and it also has code chunks. We used Org mode to prepare
a series of tutorials about Mplus programming\footnote{\url{http://gitlab.crmda.ku.edu/crmda/semexample}}
and the editing process is rather similar to markdown. The main reason
that I do not emphasize it in this context is that the number of Emacs
Org mode users is quite small compared to either LaTeX or markdown
at the current time. The development effort on Org mode is unpredictable.
It is much more difficult to find accurate information about how to
customize output from Org mode files.

\subsection{Should one prefer Sweave or knitr?}

In R markdown, \code{knitr} is the only available method to process
code chunks. There is no Sweave chunk engine for markdown.

For LaTeX documents, we have the choice between the traditional \code{Sweave}
chunk framework or the newer \code{knitr} framework. The syntax can
be very similar, but \code{knitr} introduced a more fine-grained
set of options for the chunks (see ``\code{knitr} code chunk options,''
\url{https://yihui.name/knitr/options}). 

One benefit of R markdown with \code{knitr} is that it is possible
to make reproducible documents about other programming languages.
I've explored markdown with knitr to weave documents about BASH shell
programming, for example.

The major reason why I resist \code{knitr} is that the format of
the output is very difficult to control. Over the years, I have used
the Listings class in LaTeX with Sweave to customize the appearance
of code input and output. So far, at least, I've not had success customizing
the output from \code{knitr}.

\section{Conclusion}

The \code{stationery} package is a snapshot survey of what is practical,
here and now, for the preparation of reproducible research reports.
It seems likely that both LaTeX and R markdown documents will continue
to exist (and compete for user loyalty) into the indefinite future.
Neither of these authoring frameworks is without flaws, but each is
workable. 

There are some authors who take an extreme position that an entire
research project, all phases in the analysis of data, should be wrapped
together into a single document. At the current time, there are practical
problems that prevent us from achieving this goal with perfect fidelity.
While the software to render regression tables has improved during
the past 10 years, none of the available programs will offer a perfectly
finalized presentation for all kinds of models. Rather, it appears
we do need to leave room for some ``hand editing'' of tables that
are exported from R. In the production graphs for figures we are considerably
closer to the perfectly presentable standard, of course, and tables
may approach that standard at some point.

The transition to a reproducible document framework will present challenges
for new users. Authors who have used LaTeX, or written with LyX, will
find this more familiar. For those authors, it will be relatively
easy to learn to insert code chunks and re-think the document compilation
process. For authors that do not have LaTeX background, it seems certain
that the LyX versions of the rnw2pdf templates, or perhaps the R markdown
formats, will be more appealing than raw LaTeX. It is easier to produce
a rudimentary document from scratch with R markdown, but using the
skeletons we provide, it seems that all of these documents should
be equally convenient. General opinion among the younger crowd on
the Internet seems to more enthusiastically endorse R markdown, while
the more experienced (dare I say ``traditional''?) crowd prefers
LaTeX. 

It is perhaps not honest to predict that new users will find any of
this to be easy or as convenient as a word processor. It is more likely
to be correct and reproducible, but it is not easy. One can expect
that authors, whether they start with \code{.Rnw} or \code{.Rmd}
files, will hit bugs as they add features which seem natural and obvious.
LaTeX equations, for example, can be included in either document format,
but preparing them correctly is not easy. Features that work well
in one format are either unavailable or more difficult in the other.
While there are many Websites touting examples of ``pretty'' or
``elegant'' documents, it seems certain that new visitors to the
reproducible documents will find bugs where the experts never dreamed
them to venture. Experts know what won't work, but they don't usually
emphasize the difficulties as much as the victories. Although the
markdown community has many eager, outspoken proponents, I have to
admit that every markdown project on which I've worked hit one or
more deep, unsolvable bugs that required re-engineering of a presentation.
One source of change/trouble is \code{pandoc} itself, which is evolving
so rapidly that software distributors cannot keep up.

One issue that users should be aware of is that the compiler tool
chains are generally fragile. Slight changes that ``seem safe''
can cause compilation failures with vague error messages. This is
partly due to the fact that the LaTeX compiler has its own layer of
difficult-to-understand errors. Also, the process of Sweaving/knitting
will stumble on errors in R code and sometimes the weaved output file
will cause errors in the LaTeX compiler. The LyX authoring environment
offers a very convenient way to rapidly move up the LaTeX learning
curve; some difficulties can be avoided. However, LyX does not have
a convenient way to test code interactively, which makes the R work
more frustrating. On the other hand, an authoring environment that
allows one to interact with R more directly, such as Emacs or RStudio,
places the LaTeX learning curve as an obstacle at the outset.

\bibliographystyle{apacitex}
\bibliography{theme/R}


\subsection*{}

<<sessioninfo, include=F, echo=F, result='hide'>>=
zz <- "stationery.Rout"
capture.output(sessionInfo(), file = zz, append = FALSE)
if (!is.null(warnings())){
    capture.output(warnings(), file = zz, append =  TRUE)
}
@

<<RoptionsRestore, echo=F, include=F>>=
## Don't delete this. It puts the interactive session options
## back the way they were. If this is compiled within a session
## it is vital to do this.
options(opts.orig)
par(par.orig)
@
\end{document}
