Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!brunix!brownvm.brown.edu!Allen
From: Allen@brownvm.brown.edu (Allen Renear)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: Help me defend LaTeX
Message-ID: <19159@brunix.UUCP>
Date: 28 Oct 89 16:48:13 GMT
References: <5954@tank.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@brunix.UUCP
Distribution: usa
Lines: 33


The new "features" being added to popular word processing packages are 
irrelevant.  And, frankly, so is TeX's reasonable pricing :) and 
implementation on many OSs.  What is fundamentally important, in the long 
run, is this:  Unlike all popular style-sheet word processing programs, 
markup languages such as TeX/LaTeX:

A) allow a document's structure to be accurately represented as *tree* of 
editorial elements, and not misrepresented as a sequence of paragraphs.  
Nothing else will *ever* do.

B) provides a programmable processing/composition language.

Sure we need better front ends, ones that are more intuitive, more 
visually compelling, that rely on recognition rather than recall, etc. 
etc.  But they must retain A) and B) if they are going to be serious 
improvements.  See SoftQuad's Author/Editor for a suggestion of the 
direction development should take. Or IBM's Quill if it is being demo'd 
yet.

Markup languages are dinosaurs? Tell it to the DoD, OCLC, ALA, European 
Economic Commission, etc. etc.  Oh yeah, to the marines too. No, markup 
langauges are the correct way to do text.  This gives them a considerable 
advantage over other approaches and will ensure their ultimate dominance. 

(We make all the arguments, at great length and in great detail, in 
"Markup Systems and the Future of Scholarly Text Processing,"  James 
Coombs, Allen Renear, Steven DeRose,*Communications of the ACM,* Nov. 1987.)

Allen Renear, Brown University; allen@brownvm.brown.edu; 401-863-7312

Allen Renear, Computing and Information Services / Brown University / 
(401) 863-7312 / allen@brownvm.brown.edu