From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed May 14 01:06:12 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA17578
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 01:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA17553
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 14 May 1997 01:06:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1])
	by rah.star-gate.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA03496;
	Wed, 14 May 1997 01:05:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199705140805.BAA03496@rah.star-gate.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Is Thot (WYSIWIG editor) for you? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 13 May 1997 23:57:36 PDT."
             <33796260.1A2C@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 01:05:50 -0700
From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

I am not sure where you are coming from ;however, you are free to write
a ports wrapper for Thot and Amaya.

As for the thot library, yeap it is a good thing to have around .
It is nice to have such a library written in C as supposed to C++.
How much of that library am I going to use ? I don't know is not 
clear to me . At lot depends on the architecture of the program.
If we use Glyphs , I supposed that we can use a lot of the library
given that the Glyph structure allows us to abstract objects:
characters, lines, columns, pages, documents.

For sure the algorithms used in Thot are worth looking into.

What I am pitching is for is that if Thot is good we can start advertising it
and hopefully standardize our internal documentation based on its format.
Internal documentation meaning things like : reports, articles, etc...



>From The Desk Of "Pedro F. Giffuni" :
> Sure it must be tested in scope and stability, but that shouldn't stop
> us from porting it, or at least submitting patches to INRIA.
> If it is not what we (you) expect form it, we can do what Amaya does and
> use Thot's library to implement a "better" tool.
> Amaya is valuable for it's own reasons: I PR'd sometime ago that Arena
> signalled "Bad HTML" on at least one page of our documentation project.
> Having an standard tool (even if it's beta) is very important.
> 
> Pedro.
> 
> 
> Amancio Hasty wrote:
> > 
> > Before even on deciding on a separate CDrom distribution , it is more
> > appropriate to decide whether thot is useful or not. On the surface
> > it looks really good , I just have to use thot more extensively  over
> > here to determine is goodness.
> > 
> >         Cheers,
> >         Amancio
> >