Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 May 1997 13:31:58 -0700
From:      "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
To:        Jean-Marc Zucconi <jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr>
Cc:        jkh@time.cdrom.com, hasty@rah.star-gate.com, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Is Thot (WYSIWIG editor) for you?
Message-ID:  <337A213E.6375@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
References:  <9705141805.AA15654@cabri.obs-besancon.fr>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jean-Marc Zucconi wrote:
> 
> >>>>> Pedro F Giffuni writes:
> 
>  > Anyway I think Amancio is right; we first have to determine if Thot is
>  > the right editor for our internal documentation. The searching process
> 
> It seems to me that you still confuse the format and the tool. The
> right editor is already there since we have vi :-) Document writers
> are free to use program X oy Y as long as the document format is SGML.
> It does not matter if the C code in /usr/src/* is written with cat, vi
> or emacs.
> 
No, I'm not confusing them. I (perhaps we) would like a WYSIWYG editor
that enforces a standarized format and that we agree is a nice tool. *I*
don't like vi, emacs or those other editors, and I don't wnat to have to
learn SGML to write documentation.
John Fieber made some excellent comments on the difference between the
application and the format. I firmly believe that even if the tool
doesn't exist we will have added benefits by searching for it.

	Pedro.

> Jean-Marc
>  _____________________________________________________________________________
>  Jean-Marc Zucconi       Observatoire de Besancon       F 25010 Besancon cedex
>                    PGP Key: finger jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr
>  =============================================================================



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?337A213E.6375>