From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: RTF for emacs Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 19:39:17 +0200 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: <8761krglyy.fsf@debian.uxu> References: <87fvjvc48v.fsf@debian.uxu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1401212427 6865 80.91.229.3 (27 May 2014 17:40:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 17:40:27 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 27 19:40:21 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WpLMJ-0006v3-Ag for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 May 2014 19:40:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36931 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WpLMI-0007oa-GP for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 May 2014 13:40:18 -0400 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 91 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: SIvZRMPqRkkTHAHL6NkRuw.user.speranza.aioe.org Original-X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:j4zzTEXeVsXTdrF4wyXeQiCkIoo= Mail-Copies-To: never Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:205633 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:97903 Archived-At: Rusi writes: >> But if I had to do those short documents (and >> couldn't use plain text) I would want something that >> still isn't "compiled". > > There's html along with html editors like mozilla. No, HTML is compiled as well. You write HTML, save the file, switch to the browser, hit the reload key (which I have `r' in Emacs-w3m - let's see, maybe I still remember? - F5 for the Joe Sixpack IE?) - and then you see the final result. This compilation of course cannot be compared to for example C with gcc (which has to optimize advanced algorithms etc.) but it is still a mapping from one representation (HTML) to another (interactive text and/or graphics). And, apparently it the process advanced enough for the big GUI browsers to still not having it look the same (I remember there was an ACID test - "acid", as it involved coloured boxes in a psychedelic way). > Org is heaven for people who think like programmers. > And by 'think like a programmer' I mean thinking > structurally rather than presentationally and looking > for a way to batch-mode boring repetitious > activities. And of course batch-mode and wysiwig are > not compatible. Well, that depends. If you mean the horrible WYSIWYG editors, than no. But isn't plain text the "true" what you see is what you get? > Yes org will compress links and in general nesting > (headings) structure but its focus is always on > structure, not presentation. That's cool, and that's how I use LaTeX (but I think you could do pixel plotting even if you wanted to) - and that what the web aspires to be (with CSS), but I think that will be completed in a distant future, if ever. But even if they do some progress with CSS I don't think it can ever compete with LaTeX when it comes to the "PDF domain", static documents and stuff. For the web, obviously I don't recommend PDFs and I get frustrated when I Google some techno-science thing and get only PDFs as hits. > For the presentation you need to call export -- a > keystroke away. Analogous to a programmer calling > the compiler Yeah, that's OK for the rare document in LaTeX but for every document - this post, for example - to compile it, review, compile again, OK, looks nice, send - I don't know how many mails and posts I send a day but if I had to compile each that would be devastating. I would have to change my activity and workflow completely. But remember I don't produce the "third kind" of documents that the OP theorized about, so I don't have this problem at all (phew). > If that is not to your taste then as I said use html. > Yeah org has nifty export-to-html. But its > uni-directional. Well... what do you mean "use HTML"? I'm sort of over building webpages but if I were to do it again I would use HTML & CSS, of course. I'm not going to use HTML for anything else and if I am to use HTML for the web I'll just edit the .html and .css files in Emacs, in the html-mode and css-mode. > Just like a C compiler can produce assembly. I can > edit the assembly if I like but its not possible to > go back from modified assembly to correspondingly > changed C. I'm not following? > Of course the same situation obtains for latex. One > can go from latex to pdf and then edit the pdf in > acrobat or some such. This is so ridiculously hard > that no one even thinks of it! I never thought about it for another reason: why would you want to do it? -- underground experts united: http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573