Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ucbvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!ucbcad!ucbvax!daemon
From: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: fa.editor-p
Subject: Re: Learning Z vs Zmacs
Message-ID: <939@ucbvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 25-Sep-83 03:37:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.939
Posted: Sun Sep 25 03:37:20 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 27-Sep-83 04:15:18 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.UUCP
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Computer Science
Lines: 18

From JQJ@SU-SCORE.ARPA  Sun Sep 25 00:36:53 1983
I stand by the statement that Dyer's session management complaints,
as I understand them, are solved in the MIT Lisp machine system.
It is true that operations on weird windows is not included in this.
How could one, for example, yank back a menu mouse click and edit it?
But insofar as the Lisp machine system has commands, they are
things you can type at a Lisp listener; and these and their output
can be edited and reinput using the Lisp (Edit) window which
Symbolics chose to flush and I chose to fix instead.

[Editor's note:  for the benefit of the general reader (e.g. me)
 could someone state the RWK/RMS debate more precisely?  It seems to
 me that they differ in their conceptualization of the purpose of a
 display, with RMS asserting that it is multi-purpose, with several
 "modes" of output -- representations of text, status messages, etc.,
 while RWK and Dyer wish to treat characters on the display
 modelessly.  Is there in fact a naatural typology of display
 uses?			  /jq ]