gdvsmit@watrose.UUCP (Riel Smit) (12/30/85)
Some (unnecessary) argumentation results from the fact that the terminology that has been used in the wysiwyg/compiler discussion is confusing, or just plain wrong. Some people talk about compiler-type formatters when they really mean declarative formatters. I think Brian Read is mostly arguing for decalarative formatters as opposed to procedural ones, while some are arguing for or against interactive vs. batch formatters and still others are arguing about wysiwyg, wysi-almost-wyg, and wysi-not-wyg systems. (If you don't know what declarative vs. procedural is, read Furuta et. al.'s Cumputing Surveys paper - Sept. 1982.) I would like an interactive, wysi-almost-wyg, declarative system that makes the editing part painless. [ With current declarative systems like Scribe, when editing the document content, the markup gets in the way and when editing the structure of the document, the content gets in the way.] At the same time I want access to a variety of formatters so that I can format my document with any of them. And that's the system we are building. Ask me about it by the end of 1986, when my thesis is done :-)