Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!ukc!castle!aipna!don!rjc
From: rjc@don.uk.ac.ed (Richard Caley)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: WYSIWYG flamage (was Re: what i
Message-ID: <1168@aipna.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 5 Aug 89 15:02:27 GMT
References: <210927@<1989Jul28> <77900017@p.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@aipna.ed.ac.uk
Reply-To: rjc@don (Richard Caley)
Organization: Dept of AI, Edinburgh, UK
Lines: 30
Dragon: Oolong

In article <77900017@p.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes:

>Troff is also missing some formatting niceties, such as the ability to
>wrap text around a picture,

To insert a comment from the other end ( ie. those who have to read this
stuff ) -- why would anyone want to do this. It is a stupid idea. It is
a great way to take your text and turn it into a piece of gibberish.

The only thing I have seen which is worse is a magazine I used to read
which had the habbit of printing things _over_ grey scale images. Yeuch.

>I believe TeX will survive longer because its equation-formatting and
>word-spacing ability is unparalleled.  But it will eventually succomb
>to the WYSWYG revolution, or its equations will be incorporated into a
>WYSWYG editor.

Ok, why do people think TeX is good for doing math? What am I missing?
Why is it causing me hours of headaches to get LaTeX ( maybe plain TeX
is better? ) to let me do other than trivial formulae in a semi-readable
manner? 

WYSIWHG is even worse - that's what convinced me to try LaTeX . . .

--
rjc@uk.ac.ed.aipna		    Have you hugged your Knnn today?
	rjc@uk.ac.ed.aipna

 "Politics! You can wrap it up in fancy ribbons, but you can't hide the smell"
			- Jack Barron