Re- text formating

Re- text formating

[Gottfried]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3352 bytes --]

Hi,

> Most people are from the opposite side of the spectrum, i.e.
>> text editor, not word processor.

> but in practise it's an
>> uphill battle 

I, as an Emacs layman, would suggest:

If somebody see’s it as a task, can work on it,
or can at least add thoughts,
and together the fight of an uphill battle
will be easier.

You, who are masters in Emacs
and know everything/almost everything,

can create a major mode

e.g. to take the "enriched mode"
give it an other name
and add features, one after the other
take away features which don't fit

and create a WYSIWYG mode/word processor.

More than 10000 people worked hard over the last 40 years
to create a "text editor".

Would it not be the time to create also a
"word-processor-mode" in Emacs, which doesn’t need to be like other word 
processors with all kinds of possibilities,
but simply to have the basics of a word processor in Emacs,

so you have all the advantages of Emacs
and additionally for some people a mode,
which has certain possibilities of text manipulation.

If somebody has time and interest,
he can always add features,
but we need the basics for a "word-processor-mode" /WYSWYG style in Emacs.

TeXmacs and Mogan are interesting, I installed them today, but I didn’t 
have time yet to deal with them.
In Mogan (more than in TeXmacs) you can use certain Emacs keybindings. 
C-keys,  M-keys didn’t work in my first attempt to try them.

But we need such features in Emacs, because Emacs is very well 
developed. And there are certain people who would enjoy it to have also 
such a "word-processor-mode" in which you can do more than in enriched-mode.

That, as I said, are the thoughts of an Emacs layman, because I just 
started two month ago to get to know Emac, but am confronted with too 
little word-processing possibilities.

Gottfried


> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2023 18:24:08 +0100
> From: Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: text formating
> Message-ID: <87bkmall1j.fsf@dataswamp.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain
> 
> Jean Louis wrote:
> 
>>> If you are talking specifically about WYSIWYG printing,
>>> then yes, we still aren't where we should be, especially
>>> with non-ASCII text; patches welcome. But the OP didn't
>>> mention that, so this is not necessarily what was
>>> the issue.
>>
>> Here is how Enriched Text may become word processor with
>> pleasant result
> 
> Most people are from the opposite side of the spectrum, i.e.
> text editor, not word processor.
> 
> Here is where you should look
> 
>   https://www.techradar.com/news/the-best-free-word-processor
> 
> In principle, I don't see why Emacs cannot be like that as
> well for those whow opt-in on it, but in practise it's an
> uphill battle - I don't see us every getting there, for the
> said reason, most people who are here or come here do that for
> the opposite, the text/programmer's editor side of it.
> 
> Jean, what features is it exactly that you miss?
> 
> For example, that they have in LibreOffice Writer?
> 
> Because, if you focus on those, maybe you have better luck
> getting them individually so to speak.
> 
> -- 
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
> 

-- 
Kind regards

Gottfried


[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3191 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]

Re: Re- text formating

[Emanuel Berg]

Gottfried wrote:

> That, as I said, are the thoughts of an Emacs layman,
> because I just started two month ago to get to know Emac,
> but am confronted with too little
> word-processing possibilities.

Okay, but absolutely, just what's the most important thing you
feel we don't have?

Maybe we have something to that extent, or, if not, indeed
someone, and maybe you, can start working on it ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Re- text formating

[Jean Louis]

* Gottfried <gottfried@posteo.de> [2023-02-05 20:22]:
> I, as an Emacs layman, would suggest:
> 
> If somebody see’s it as a task, can work on it, or can at least add
> thoughts, and together the fight of an uphill battle will be easier.
> 
> You, who are masters in Emacs
> and know everything/almost everything,
> 
> can create a major mode
> 
> e.g. to take the "enriched mode"
> give it an other name
> and add features, one after the other
> take away features which don't fit
> 
> and create a WYSIWYG mode/word processor.

Thanks, that is really good notion, and it is possible to get
something similar to word processor. It would require to synchronize
printed output to visible buffers.

Personally, word processor feature in Emacs I would use only for
simple letters or simple documents.

I already do that and it is pleasant to forget about markups, and only
use simple text, create letters, corporate resolutions, agreements and
contracts with simple text. And then I use rcd-paps.el library to
print it. As Unicode and smilies are solved in that library, all
printing is simply alright and perfect. No thinking.

In similar way, word processor features I would not use for complex
documents.

Well known word processor software are not suitable for document
preparation and typesetting like TeX, LaTeX and akin are. 

When you wish to make a presentation, or few letters document, it is
fine with word processor.

But what I can do in LaTeX is way more expressive.

> Would it not be the time to create also a "word-processor-mode" in
> Emacs, which doesn’t need to be like other word processors with all
> kinds of possibilities, but simply to have the basics of a word
> processor in Emacs,

Yes. And no.

> so you have all the advantages of Emacs and additionally for some
> people a mode, which has certain possibilities of text manipulation.

Yes, for some people.

And one also has to consider that majority of people using Emacs
already know how to produce beautiful, structured and professional
documents by using Emacs without using word processor.

Many are way beyond word processor, as word processor cannot satisfy
needs of that group of people.

My needs it doesn't satisfy. 

I also do not see why should I be wasting time with positioning of the
letter left or right, multiple spaces in word processor are not
logical, but with mistake my document will look weird.

With LaTeX or Asciidoctor, computer is the one taking care of it for
me. It minimizes human errors.

> That, as I said, are the thoughts of an Emacs layman, because I just
> started two month ago to get to know Emac, but am confronted with
> too little word-processing possibilities.

Feel free to tel me which specific function you need. Then I may
point to how to do it.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

Re- text formating

[Gottfried]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5901 bytes --]

Thanks Jean,

very good thoughts.

Exactly what I meant, people like you know Emacs and know what is 
possible to do.

My problem is:

I don’t have the time to learn to use Emacs for at least 3 years
in order to be able to use it well.
So that I can e.g. do some "word formatting".

That’s why I was asking to simplify Emacs in order to get a WYSIWYG 
mode, word-mode,

>>> Personally, word processor feature in Emacs I would use only for
>>> simple letters or simple documents.

> I already do that and it is pleasant to forget about markups, and only
>> use simple text, create letters, corporate resolutions, agreements and
>> contracts with simple text. And then I use rcd-paps.el library to
>> print it. As Unicode and smilies are solved in that library, all
>> printing is simply alright and perfect. No thinking.

This is basically (with some abilities to highlight text), what I 
wanted, but in an easier way to do it.
I am not able to do that.

> And one also has to consider that majority of people using Emacs
>> already know how to produce beautiful, structured and professional
>> documents by using Emacs without using word processor.
>> 
>> Many are way beyond word processor, as word processor cannot satisfy
>> needs of that group of people.

I don’t need to create professional documents.

I don’t know Latex, Org-mode, an so on.

Somebody who knows that can surely create beautiful documents according 
to his needs and feelings.

Emacs is surely not made for professional word processing.
Nobody wants that. There is no need for this.
But it would be good to create more options and possibilities and a sort 
of "easier doing" the stuff like the two examples.

Two examples e.g.

1.
I am using "enriched-mode" at the moment.
I wanted to make the headings "bold"
I did that.
But when trying to print it, I opened my browser and loaded this file.
What I saw was, that all headings had formatting signs.
I couldn’t print the document with formatting signs.

So how do I get rid of the formating signs, which enriched mode used for 
bold letters?

It would be good, to have a mode in which, after doing something in 
enriched-mode I don’t get the formatting signs when wanting to print 
this file or have to convert the file several times to get to my result.

2.
I wanted to increase the letters of the headings.
It would be good to have 3-5 possibilities of increasing the letters. 
(larger, still larger, large, very large, huge)
It is about highlighting some words so that the text becomes easier to read.

I couldn’t do that in enriched mode.

If I am using a mode like Latex
I am irritated by the formating sign.
It takes my concentration away from the text I want to write.
Additinally I don’t see the outcome immediately.

That’s why I want a WYSIWYG mode, where I am not irritated by formatting 
signs and where I can see immediately the outcome of the text, in case I 
want to print it.
I am not used being surrounded by formatting signs.

I hope I could make my point understandable.

sincere greetings

Gottfried


Am 07.02.23 um 11:00 schrieb Jean Louis:
> * Gottfried <gottfried@posteo.de> [2023-02-05 20:22]:
>> I, as an Emacs layman, would suggest:
>>
>> If somebody see’s it as a task, can work on it, or can at least add
>> thoughts, and together the fight of an uphill battle will be easier.
>>
>> You, who are masters in Emacs
>> and know everything/almost everything,
>>
>> can create a major mode
>>
>> e.g. to take the "enriched mode"
>> give it an other name
>> and add features, one after the other
>> take away features which don't fit
>>
>> and create a WYSIWYG mode/word processor.
> 
> Thanks, that is really good notion, and it is possible to get
> something similar to word processor. It would require to synchronize
> printed output to visible buffers.
> 
> Personally, word processor feature in Emacs I would use only for
> simple letters or simple documents.
> 
> I already do that and it is pleasant to forget about markups, and only
> use simple text, create letters, corporate resolutions, agreements and
> contracts with simple text. And then I use rcd-paps.el library to
> print it. As Unicode and smilies are solved in that library, all
> printing is simply alright and perfect. No thinking.
> 
> In similar way, word processor features I would not use for complex
> documents.
> 
> Well known word processor software are not suitable for document
> preparation and typesetting like TeX, LaTeX and akin are.
> 
> When you wish to make a presentation, or few letters document, it is
> fine with word processor.
> 
> But what I can do in LaTeX is way more expressive.
> 
>> Would it not be the time to create also a "word-processor-mode" in
>> Emacs, which doesn’t need to be like other word processors with all
>> kinds of possibilities, but simply to have the basics of a word
>> processor in Emacs,
> 
> Yes. And no.
> 
>> so you have all the advantages of Emacs and additionally for some
>> people a mode, which has certain possibilities of text manipulation.
> 
> Yes, for some people.
> 
> 
> 
> My needs it doesn't satisfy.
> 
> I also do not see why should I be wasting time with positioning of the
> letter left or right, multiple spaces in word processor are not
> logical, but with mistake my document will look weird.
> 
> With LaTeX or Asciidoctor, computer is the one taking care of it for
> me. It minimizes human errors.
> 
>> That, as I said, are the thoughts of an Emacs layman, because I just
>> started two month ago to get to know Emac, but am confronted with
>> too little word-processing possibilities.
> 
> Feel free to tel me which specific function you need. Then I may
> point to how to do it.
> 

-- 
Kind regards

Gottfried



[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3191 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]

Re: Re- text formating

[Daniel Fleischer]

Gottfried [2023-02-07 Tue 10:57] wrote:

> That’s why I was asking to simplify Emacs in order to get a WYSIWYG mode, word-mode,
>
> I don’t need to create professional documents.
>
> I don’t know Latex, Org-mode, an so on.

It's an interesting question. In order to think about it you need to
expand the context. Say there's a mode that combines text with
formatting. How are you going to save this on file? Which format?
text/enrich is ancient and looks like html so it's not easy to read
outside Emacs. Rich text format (RTF) is proprietary. You start moving
towards light markup languages such as asciidoc, org, markdown which
strike a good tradeoff between human readability, expressive enough to
describe various formattings easily, they're open source and there are
many tools that can present them nicely. If you insist on not learning
any markup language and interested in WYSIWYG experience maybe you
should give Texmacs a try:

https://texmacs.org/tmweb/home/welcome.en.html

There's some WYSIWYG aspects in Emacs, for example in Auctex. But
probably there wasn't much demand for that in the past. 

-- 
Daniel Fleischer

Re: Re- text formating

[Jean Louis]

* Daniel Fleischer <danflscr@gmail.com> [2023-02-07 17:24]:
> It's an interesting question. In order to think about it you need to
> expand the context. Say there's a mode that combines text with
> formatting. How are you going to save this on file? Which format?
> text/enrich is ancient and looks like html so it's not easy to read
> outside Emacs.

26.14 Enriched Text
===================

Enriched mode is a minor mode for editing formatted text files in a
WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) fashion.  When Enriched mode is
enabled, you can apply various formatting properties to the text in the
buffer, such as fonts and colors; upon saving the buffer, those
properties are saved together with the text, using the MIME
‘text/enriched’ file format.

I do not quite agree that it is what you see is what you get.

I also do not agree it is ancient just because it was created long
ago.

Default text is something easiest to write letter, position the
address, date, subject, it is easiest to write corporate resolution,
articles and memorandum of understanding, notices, demand letters,
invoices. 

That some people stop using simple for reason that commercial programs
advertise their templates, still does not diminish usefulness of
simple text, and also of enriched text.

But it can definitely be used for beautiful printing with bold,
italic, line centering, those basic text properties.

All what I want is to parse those text properties, translate to Pango
and then have `paps' print it.

For example, from enriched text:

hello there
(buffer-string) ➜ #("
hello there
(buffer-string)" 0 1 (rear-nonsticky (hard) hard t) 1 12 (face bold)
12 13 (rear-nonsticky (hard) hard t face bold) 13 28 (face bold))

I would like to map above to this:
https://docs.gtk.org/Pango/pango_markup.html

But where do I find explanation of "read-nonsticky"? or (hard) hard?

I find it as sex joke.

(rear-nonsticky (hard) hard t)

Back to business.

When I use `M-x describe-text-properties' I get for example:

There are text properties here:
  hard                 t
  rear-nonsticky       (hard)

I cannot know what to do with "hard", wand "rear-nonsticky", how
should I translate that to Pango?

Any idea?

Should I parse chunk by chunk like word?

Or character by character?

Or by (buffer-string) how it is defined inside?

Is there any function that parses buffer-string text properties that I
can reuse?

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/