Re: word processor document format: what parts?

[Rebecca Ore <rebecca ore op net>]

On Sat, 19 Sep 1998, Timothy Ritchey wrote:
>> > 2) Bob is a word clone.  It is a wordprocessor.
>> >       <MUCHO SNIPO>
>> However, I tend to think that the
>> distinction between an SGML editor and a WP is a false dichotomy.
>> My proposal would be to implement it that way: structure for full SGML
>> editing -- and then allow for a limited mode that only understands
>> typical WP stuff.
>
>To say something is a "WORD" replacement is only commenting on the
>interface. If someone doesn't know (or care!) if the underlying
>structure is SGML, then that should work too. Fankly, I would LOVE a WP
>that I could pound out a quick letter, WYSIWYG fasion, print it out, and
>forget about - all in SGML. I don't see why we have to have one and not
>the other. My goal would be to create SGML for the masses as it where. I
>think that those of us pushing XML/XSL tangents have a specific "world
>view" on how documents should be. 


The basic guts of the thing should be the most effecient document handler
going.  I haven't read up on this, but it needs to talk to all possible other
programs, too.

Inside.  I'm not a coder, so I don't know what would be best.

Outside, the thing absolutely must be WYSIWYG by default.  If people want a
Show-Codes option as per WP, that's useful.  The document structure should be
basically functional, not typological (i.e. Header I, not Ariel pt. 18 Bold),
but there should be a way to change the typological descriptions of the
structural elements, and there should be a way to add new structural elements
and create new style sheets.

Apropo help -- can we do this?  "How do I change the formating?"  "How do I add
new rows to the table?" should give reasonable answers.  

 Handling of printing --  is this our job or the job of another program within
the Gnome family?

 >XML DOES mean more work, and this is something I am not
afraid to point
 >out - but it also means that the documents we build with this
tool will
 >be more useful. At the same time, there are already many tools
available
 >from which we can gain implementation features. SGML was around
long
 >before Word as far as I know - and is now coming back as XML - there is
>a reason. Format based documents are worthless except for printing and
>displaying - eye candy.

Um, any number of people use a word processor to get a transient document for
printing.


I've never heard of people using Folio (a Win 95 infobase program) as a wp, but
it seems we're talking somewhat the same concepts.

-- 
Rebecca Ore