From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Emacs as word processor Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 09:44:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <5288A59E.7030109@dancol.org> <87vbzqfgd6.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87mwl04w3k.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <87iovo4caz.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <877gc14vzs.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <878uwhxnqe.fsf@informatimago.com> <83txf4cw9z.fsf@gnu.org> <416D7143-AE4A-45FF-A3A3-AA208D268D97@informatimago.com> <83hab4ce1o.fsf@gnu.org> <87vbzkvyiz.fsf@informatimago.com> <83bo1bcysn.fsf@gnu.org> <87bo1bw7xx.fsf@informatimago.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1385315106 1113 80.91.229.3 (24 Nov 2013 17:45:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:45:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs-Devel devel To: PJ Weisberg Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 24 18:45:09 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1Vkdk0-0000Iz-GY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:45:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48037 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vkdjz-0000hM-UO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 12:45:03 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45160) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vkdjo-0000h1-NT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 12:45:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vkdjf-0000Vu-W2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 12:44:52 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:49116) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vkdjf-0000Vq-PO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 12:44:43 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id rAOHigBc000819 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:44:42 GMT Original-Received: from aserz7022.oracle.com (aserz7022.oracle.com [141.146.126.231]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rAOHifkA019774 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:44:41 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0011.oracle.com (abhmp0011.oracle.com [141.146.116.17]) by aserz7022.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rAOHifiw015505; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:44:41 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8 (707110) [OL 12.0.6680.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:165656 Archived-At: > In the context of a WYSIWYG word processor, why in god's name > would the user be specifying a DTD? (Why would anyone want to do anything in a god's name, unless s?he were running for some kind of high priest?) --- FWIW, and without wanting to dig further into this discussion: Doc tools used by doc professionals include some that are both WYSIWYG and structure-based. And these are typically considered the best doc tools available currently. Examples: Framemaker, Arbortext, and XMetal, with Framemaker being somewhat better than others in the WYSIWYG department.=20 Such tools are typically XML-based nowadays. They are in fact XML editors, and generally have excellent round-tripping. Structure is enforced by XML validation against a DTD or an XML-Schema schema. And there is excellent support for structure editing, both lax (you can create invalid structure and clean it up later) and strict (you can perform only actions that do not invalidate the structure, even temporarily). And yet the display and interaction can be WYSIWYG. There are typically multiple views: from WYSIWYG (sometimes multiple such, depending on what is to be shown/emphasized) to XML markup using plain-text, with combinations: WYSIWYG but showing XML elements and attributes. Typically, such views are not just push-a-button-to-update-result. Each view is editable, and the effect is reflected immediately in any and all of them. Typically, a user edits in both a structure window and a WYSIWYG window, using whichever is handier for the editing task at hand. All this is to say that a structural - and even a textual, markup, plain-text representation of a document - is NOT incompatible with a WYSIWYG representation, and the two are not incompatible wrt interactive editing. That said, these are mature products with lots of hours of development behind them. Emacs could of course try to progress in such a direction, adding such to its wishlist. But in that case I'd suggest biting off small pieces to attack at a time, as the full realization of something like this would be a lot of work. Emacs could choose to build such an effort on top of XML or JSON (?) or TeX or Org or whatever. Or just Lisp sexps (lists). For purposes of exchange and pluggability and tools (e.g. XQuery, XSLT), XML could be a natural choice. But then again, those things are ultimately about I/O and persistence - they impose nothing about the implementation. To be clear, I am not proposing that Emacs develop such capabilities, nor am I opposing that. Just providing some info. (BTW, my advice is to forget about MS Word, which much of this discussion has turned around. MS Office products are now based on XML. But as others have pointed out, it is not the best XML. And interactively the products are far from a guide wrt what Emacs could/should do. The best that can be said for them is that their use of XML can at least now let other XML-based products exchange data with them and manipulate their documents, modulo hiccups. And they will no doubt get better with time.)