![]() In the past decade the empirical observation that it was difficult to write well structured documents with wysiwyg editors has made place for a doctrine that such a thing would be impossible. See for instance section 1.5 of Lamport’s book on LATEX for some widely accepted reasons why not to use wysiwyg editors. In this context, LATEX is often compared to wysiwyg (what you see is what you get) text editors, which are claimed to concentrate only on visual design and not logical design. The introductions of popular books on TEX and especially LATEX usually start with a celebration of the benefits of structured documents and generic markup. We next discuss the program GNU TEXmacs and some of its innovations in relation to the difficulties of structured, wysiwyg, technical text editing. In this paper, we analyze the reasons behind this belief. There is a common belief that wysiwyg technical editors are not suited for editing structured texts and generating documents with a high typographical quality. ![]() 425) Université Paris-Sud 91405 Orsay CEDEX (France) Ībstract. GNU TeXmacs: A free, structured, wysiwyg and technical text editor Joris van der Hoeven Dépt.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |