Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Tim Johnson]

Using:
GNU Emacs 25.3.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.18.9)

I've used emacs since 2000 primarily for coding. 

I also write prose in LibreOffice Writer and save it in primarily
three formats:

1)PDF
2)MS-Word Docx
3)Copied and pasted to an online WYSIWYG editor and saved to a web
page.

It would be great if I could use emacs at least partially in these
endeavours. I would welcome any and all thoughts on this subject.

Thank you
-- 
Tim Johnson
http://www.tj49.com

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Robert Pluim]

Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> writes:

> Using:
> GNU Emacs 25.3.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.18.9)
>
> I've used emacs since 2000 primarily for coding. 
>
> I also write prose in LibreOffice Writer and save it in primarily
> three formats:
>
> 1)PDF
> 2)MS-Word Docx
> 3)Copied and pasted to an online WYSIWYG editor and saved to a web
> page.
>
> It would be great if I could use emacs at least partially in these
> endeavours. I would welcome any and all thoughts on this subject.

When I can, I write in org-mode, and use its exporting functions to
generate ODF or html or PDF.

Robert

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Amin Bandali]

Seconded.

I, too, think WYSIWYG capabilities would be useful to have in Emacs,
and I'd always appreciate having one less reason to leave Emacs.

The subject did come up on emacs-devel back in March, with RMS
mentioning [0] that:

> However, making progress on Emacs as a word processor is one of my
> specific goals.  This is what Emacs needs to do to be useful in all
> the ways it should be useful.
> 
> It will only take a few more features to make Emacs start to be useful
> as a word processor.  Once we can do proper formatting of paragraphs
> with variable-width text, with a few kinds of alignment, and we can
> save these in files, we will be able to use it for writing letters and
> handouts, instead of LibreOffice.

I'm out of the loop with respect to development on the listed useful
features.  I'd love to hear more about if anything new has been added
and/or what's missing there.


[0]: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2018-03/msg00189.html

-amin

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Eric S Fraga]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 829 bytes --]

On Tuesday, 29 May 2018 at 11:09, Tim Johnson wrote:
> Using:
> GNU Emacs 25.3.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.18.9)
>
> I've used emacs since 2000 primarily for coding. 
>
> I also write prose in LibreOffice Writer and save it in primarily
> three formats:
>
> 1)PDF
> 2)MS-Word Docx
> 3)Copied and pasted to an online WYSIWYG editor and saved to a web
> page.
>
> It would be great if I could use emacs at least partially in these
> endeavours. I would welcome any and all thoughts on this subject.

I use org mode for all of my writing.  It can "export" to all three
targets you mention, albeit in 2 steps for docx.  Depending on the
complexity of your prose, you might find that org mode meets all of your
needs (and more!).

-- 
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 27.0.50 & org 9.1.6 on Debian buster/sid

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 194 bytes --]

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Tim Johnson]

* Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> [180529 11:13]:
> Using:
> GNU Emacs 25.3.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.18.9)
> 
> I've used emacs since 2000 primarily for coding. 
> 
> I also write prose in LibreOffice Writer and save it in primarily
> three formats:
> 
> 1)PDF
> 2)MS-Word Docx
> 3)Copied and pasted to an online WYSIWYG editor and saved to a web
> page.
> 
> It would be great if I could use emacs at least partially in these
> endeavours. I would welcome any and all thoughts on this subject.
  I've been convinced that getting onboard with org mode would be a
  good thing and an edification. 
  Thanks
-- 
Tim Johnson
http://www.tj49.com

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Bob Newell]

So far I've written seven novels (and published two with more coming)
and numerous stories in org-mode. When publishing, there is some work
needed after exporting to LaTeX, but that would be true no matter what
initial editor or word processor you used.

At this point I couldn't see myself using any other tool, not
LibreOffice, not Scrivener, or anything else.

The advantages of plain text are hard to overstate, as is the
advantage of having everything from plot notes to research material in
a single (large) file under version control. And building up a novel
from an outline is a natural process with org-mode.

-- 
Bob Newell
Honolulu, Hawai`i

Sent via Linux Mint 17.

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Eric S Fraga]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 521 bytes --]

On Wednesday, 30 May 2018 at 06:58, Bob Newell wrote:

[...]

> The advantages of plain text are hard to overstate, as is the
> advantage of having everything from plot notes to research material in
> a single (large) file under version control. And building up a novel
> from an outline is a natural process with org-mode.

+1.

I'm giving a presentation next week on reproducible research and this is
exactly one of the key messages.

-- 
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 27.0.50 & org 9.1.6 on Debian buster/sid

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 194 bytes --]

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[ken]

On 05/30/2018 12:58 PM, Bob Newell wrote:
> The advantages of plain text are hard to overstate, as is the
> advantage of having everything from plot notes to research material in
> a single (large) file under version control. And building up a novel
> from an outline is a natural process with org-mode.


Yes to all, except... I tried org-mode a few years ago and found it
often limiting and sometimes difficult to fathom, the latter mostly due
to geekified terminology. So I stayed with html (along with CSS, of
course).  Why should I write in something that can be converted into
html, when I can write in html directly?  There are many reasons why I
prefer html (I use html-helper-mode) over org-mode, but a major
consideration is that the Kindle publishing language is essentially
html, in ways a subset of it, with a few Kindle-proprietary html tags
tossed in.

Just thought I'd toss in another option.

Whatever your favorite flavor-mode, it's nice to see authors using emacs.

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Bob Newell]

I'm very much in favor of the "do what works best for you" approach.
In my use case, I want the outlining and selective export features of
org-mode. And, since I publish both print and ebook versions of my
work, being able to export to multiple formats is a big advantage:
LaTeX for the print book and HTML for the ebook (although I've varied
that process as I've developed my workflow). I also want minimal
markup distraction within my text as I create it.

-- 
Bob Newell
Honolulu, Hawai`i

Sent via Linux Mint 17.

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Tim Johnson]

* ken <gebser@mousecar.com> [180530 10:58]:
> On 05/30/2018 12:58 PM, Bob Newell wrote:
> > The advantages of plain text are hard to overstate, as is the
> > advantage of having everything from plot notes to research material in
> > a single (large) file under version control. And building up a novel
> > from an outline is a natural process with org-mode.
> 
> 
> Yes to all, except... I tried org-mode a few years ago and found it
> often limiting and sometimes difficult to fathom, the latter mostly due
> to geekified terminology. So I stayed with html (along with CSS, of
> course).  Why should I write in something that can be converted into
> html, when I can write in html directly?  There are many reasons why I
> prefer html (I use html-helper-mode) over org-mode, but a major
> consideration is that the Kindle publishing language is essentially
> html, in ways a subset of it, with a few Kindle-proprietary html tags
> tossed in.
> 
> Just thought I'd toss in another option.
> 
> Whatever your favorite flavor-mode, it's nice to see authors using emacs.
  I'm willing to roll up my sleeves are take on org-mode. 
  
  Having said that, when ken refers to "geekified terminology" it
  brings up what has been a pet peeve of mine for decades: The use
  of domain-specific terminology for various software systems. 
  
  Oftentimes, interpreting the terminology is half of the effort I
  make to learn a new system.

-- 
Tim Johnson
http://www.tj49.com

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Eric S Fraga]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 788 bytes --]

On Wednesday, 30 May 2018 at 11:10, Tim Johnson wrote:
>   Having said that, when ken refers to "geekified terminology" it
>   brings up what has been a pet peeve of mine for decades: The use
>   of domain-specific terminology for various software systems. 

This is a problem not just in software but in almost any area of human
endeavour!  For instance, the word "model" means a person in the fashion
industry, an animal in the bio-sciences, a physical artefact in
architecture, a set of mathematical equations in engineering, ...

There are indeed domain specific terms in the org (and Emacs more
generally) documentation.  I'm sure all would appreciate contributions
to the documentation, however!

-- 
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 27.0.50 & org 9.1.13 on Debian buster/sid

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 194 bytes --]

Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Tim Johnson]

* Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> [180531 03:41]:
> On Wednesday, 30 May 2018 at 11:10, Tim Johnson wrote:
> >   Having said that, when ken refers to "geekified terminology" it
> >   brings up what has been a pet peeve of mine for decades: The use
> >   of domain-specific terminology for various software systems. 
> 
> This is a problem not just in software but in almost any area of human
> endeavour!  For instance, the word "model" means a person in the fashion
> industry, an animal in the bio-sciences, a physical artefact in
> architecture, a set of mathematical equations in engineering, ...
> 
> There are indeed domain specific terms in the org (and Emacs more
> generally) documentation.  I'm sure all would appreciate contributions
> to the documentation, however!

  What he said! 
  
  Consider the word "control": as a programmer, has one
  meaning; my son the accountant uses the same word differently.

  Control has an entirely separate meaning in surveying. As a
  onetime surveyor I watched dumbfounded as a fellow surveyor told a
  property owner that we were "controlling" his property line. 

  Didn't think I was going to get out of that one alive ...

-- 
Tim Johnson
http://www.tj49.com