Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!kunivv1!eykhout
From: eykhout@kunivv1.sci.kun.nl (Victor Eijkhout)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: WYSIWYG = DIY =hubris (anyone know what that means?)
Message-ID: <397@kunivv1.sci.kun.nl>
Date: 16 Aug 89 11:30:51 GMT
References: <210927@<1989Jul28> <8800031@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <387@kunivv1.sci.kun.nl> <1499@l.cc.purdue.edu>
Reply-To: eykhout@wn2.UUCP (Victor Eijkhout)
Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Lines: 33

In article <1499@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>WYSIWYG systems are the only reasonable thing for someone writing the 
>paper.  
Mark-up languages are the only reasonable thing for someone realistic
enough to know that he is a writer, not a typographical designer.

>When I compose my articles, I prefer to putting the stuff on
>the screen instead of on pieces of paper.  
When I compose my articles, I am a mathematician; I do my layout
macro writing on seperate days. 
Furthermore, I want every sentence to start on a
new line in my input. My eyes don't want to be tortured by a 
Times Roman at 70dpi.

>I have written papers using
>TeX, and it is a real pain.
I have tried to do even simple documents in MSWord and Ragtime, and
it is a real pain.

>There is no reason why a WYSIWYG system cannot be augmented into a TeX-
>like system.  
There is no reason why TeX cannot be augmented with a wysiwig-like
user interface, while retaining its power.

>In any case, it should produce output which can be easily
>and mainly mechanically converted into a typesetting language.
Right. But this is the trivial part.

Well, this discussion don't seem to be converging. Fortunately
typesetting systems are, with style sheets in wysiwyg
systems, and two-window TeX on Amiga, or the VorTeX project.

Victor.