On Sunday 07 December 2003 17:42, Dan Hatton wrote:
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, MJ Ray wrote:
A true "WYSIWYG [HTML] editor" is impossible.
This seems to have met with general agreement, and a polarization into those who are willing to sacrifice (standards-compliant) HTML for WYSIWYG, and those who are willing to sacrifice WYSIWYG for standards-compliant HTML. I personally either code my HTML by hand in emacs, or code LaTeX by hand in emacs, then use LaTeX2HTML.
This path leads to infinity in either direction. At one end we all get to do word processing using text markup rather than Open Office / MS Word etc. Few would advocate that, yet GUI word processors are almost as unpredictable as HTML RAD tools. Then there's assembly-language for programming, on the grounds that no compiler can do the job properly. True, as it happens, and coding in assembler can be great fun, but most of us are willing to accept the trade-offs in the interests of getting the job done some time this century.
At the other end is a fuzzy, sloppy, ToyTown of bright primary colours where little effort is required but results are imprecise and unpredictable. Word processing using voice-to-text and programming by dragging icons around a screen.
You can be anywhere along this path, even in different places at different times and for different kinds of work. What's important is that you have the freedom to choose and the willingness to accept the limitations of your choices; the way they affect yourself and those who are the consumers of your work.
When I first encountered (and was smitten by) the Mac in 1984, many of my co-workers were sniffy about what they saw as unnecessary eye-candy. On one occasion I was even asked by my customer not to waste so much time producing pretty word-processed documents; every one else was doing plain text, often on typewriters (historical note; a mechanical device for creating textual images on paper). I and my fellow converts were spending no more time; we just got our message across better/quicker with MacWrite. I think there's still a lingering suspicion of GUI tools; a kind of Luddism that's found a natural home in corners of the Linux world. Nothing wrong with that; everyone needs a home and it's great that Linux can provide it. But we don't all have to live the same way. The great majority, both washed and un-washed, want GUI tools and see arguments about quality and coding style - and the command line in general - as a kind of hair-shirt puritanism.
-- GT
Hey - we have ordinary Joe; how about green-screen loving, GUI-hating Ned? (Duck)