Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ucbvax!korn
From: korn@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU (Peter "Arrgh" Korn)
Newsgroups: net.text
Subject: Re: WYSIWYG
Message-ID: <11301@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Fri, 27-Dec-85 14:55:56 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.11301
Posted: Fri Dec 27 14:55:56 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Dec-85 06:21:35 EST
References: <2592@glacier.ARPA> <11287@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <990@mako.UUCP> <2643@glacier.ARPA>
Reply-To: korn@ucbvax.UUCP (Peter "Arrgh" Korn)
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 18

In article <2643@glacier.ARPA> reid@glacier.UUCP (Brian Reid) writes:
>.
>.
>I claim, by the way, that it is an intrinsic contradiction for WYSIWYG
>formatters and compiled formatters to co-exist. At least as I am arguing
>them, the coexistence is a meaningless concept. If I find the energy and the
>time soon I will post an explanation as to why this is so.

Gosh Brian, I hope that you do find the time; I'd love to see your arguement!
Just b/c you see on the screen as close an aproximation of what the output
will look like, that means (as I understand your meaning) that I can't compile
the instructions for printing, nor can I use a seperate set of commands to
display and print (kinda like write2troff, but that exists, and contradicts
Brians yet to come forth arguement, which I wouldn't want to do, as I really
want to see this arguement).

-----
Peter Korn	korn@Berkeley.LotsONets		!ucbvax!korn