Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote:
>
> > - Which one do you prefer? (why?)
>
> I prefer the last one, because it explains the WYSIWYM principle the best.
That makes two out of two. And I'm the third (but didn't want to bias
you all). Question is now: Does anybody have a problem with 3, or
consider 2
clearly better?
> There are a few typos: "ar" -> "are".
> Latex -> LaTeX.
Hmmm, as soon as I'm back into Linux.
> What You See Is What you MEAN -> What You See Is What You Mean.
Intentionally. Emphasized. Oops, y -> Y.
> As some of you know, I use Microsoft Windows daily, and in particular
> Word. The other day I noticed that Microsoft Word actually is
I commiserate.
> introducing more and more of the logical editing.
[long story cut short]
> But it's worth keeping an
> eye on, because it seems that others begin to notice the advantage of
> taking advantage of the screen.
Yeah, the are good at copying. I believe that the whole original idea of
paragraph styles, style sheets, etc. was pinched straight from LaTeX.
(well,
where did Lamport get it from originally? Wasn't there a software called
'Scribe'?) Good ideas get copied.
> Word is an excellent application to use, if you have tried LyX first.
> Then you know how to use Word in the right way. (This might be something
> worth touting at some point: Using LyX educates you to use your other
> word processor better ;-)
Definitely true. I refer to my earlier note about how my colleagues
write section headers using finger paint.
Recently I found (and had to type it into our web page) an
"instructions to authors" page containing instructions about how to
format contributions using Word.
"The other headers in BIG letters, numbered, flush left. Headers and
paragraphs to be separated by one blank line without indent."
Beautiful, ain't it? ;-}
I have actually an idea worth thinking about but for which I will have
no time to do anything about in the near future, although it fascinates
me.
It is the idea for a little program that can be called "latexconf",
whose
only function it would be to interactively compose a file redefining
many of the environments used e.g. in "article". It would just write out
\renewcommand lines with options for every environment to be redefined,
and the file is to be included at the start of your document (or through
a LyX hook).
A similar thing (redefining styles) is part of MS Word. (Nobody I know
uses it :-)
This would make it easier for people that cannot write their own class
files (the vast majority) to tailor existing class files (mostly,
article
and book) to their needs without a Ph.D.
Such a utility could be written in tcl/tk or perl/tk (as we already have
perl-reLyX). Everything GUI, of course.
This would fit in nicely with Larry Marso's idea for a "LyX Usability
Project", but would produce more result with less effort than just going
out on a wild goosechase for dozens of class/layout files -- which
people
would all have to try out anyway before knowing what they are good for,
and still wouldn't precisely be what their publisher insists upon.
Opinions?
Martin (from his wife's Wintendo)
