From: dlj0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (DAVID L. JOHNSON) Subject: Re: Let's write a wordprocessor. Date: 9 Jun 1993 01:29:25 GMT
In article <C8B8rx.DD6@crdnns.crd.ge.com>, davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen) writes:
>plus index, even with a few graphics thrown in, then troff will probably
>be faster for a given task.
>
> The reason is that people spend more time with WYSIWYG editors working
>on how the output *looks*, and less on what it *says*. Lest you think
Look, the point, the original point, of this thread was to write a word
processor so that people would feel more comfortable making the switch from
dos or mac's.
I share your belief that a formatting language is superior to a word processor
ONCE you get used to it. There is a learning curve there, and you shouldn't
ignore the obsticle that that is to learning un*x. I wouldn't use the thing,
but my wife would (if it were WP compatible). It's for people like her, to
get them into a real environment, that the wordprocessor progect is so
exciting.
I personally prefer TeX. troff is too primitive.
I gotta go get a fire extinguisher.
-- Sincerely,David L. Johnson ID: dlj0@lehigh.edu Department of Mathematics Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA 18015 Telephone: 215-758-3759 (office)
#include <std/disclaimer.h>