🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1423@screamer.csee.usf.edu> pollock@screamer.csee.usf.edu (Wayne Pollock) writes:
>
>I thought I'd add my two cents worth. Maybe even three cents worth.  I also
>have switched from Word to Nisus, and while I wouldn't want to switch
>back, Nisus has many more problems for technical writers than you mentioned.

> [honest evaluation of Nisus deleted]

>The support people at Paragon are incredibly nice and helpful, and
>are open to suggestions.  They do know these things are needed, but I
>get the impression they haven't even started working on Nisus 4.0, and
>will not in the near future.  So I suppose I'll have to switch back to
>TeX soon.  The world is still waiting for someone to invent a WYSIWYG
>word processor with the power of a text formatter such as TeX.

Rather than implement a wysiwyg word processor that rivals
TeX in terms of its output (which is a HARD problem!), why
not design a two-way TeX translator that takes advantage of
the power of TeX directly?  I could definitely live with
the present crop of wysiwyg twps if only they were able to
output TeX.  That's one way to get the best of both worlds.

A TeX translator is not trivial, especially the problem
associated with math mode, but it seems to me that it's
easier to do than incorporating the intelligence of TeX
into the word processor itself.

The other way, of course, is to put a wysiwyg frontend
onto some implementation of TeX.  Either way, TeX becomes
an invisible, intermediate representation of the document.

Tom Scavo
scavo@cie.uoregon.edu