🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Jan30.060314.23809@cbnewsl.att.com> psrc@cbnewsl.att.com (Paul S. R. Chisholm) writes:
>We may have the opportunity (?) of getting a manual either in troff or
>Ventura Publisher(R) form.  I know how good vi/emacs + troff is; how
>about Ventura Publisher?  From what I've heard, it's a better word
>processor than most page layout ("desktop publishing") programs . . .
>but that may not be saying much.  No spelling checks?  How are the
>search and replace facilities?  Anything else come to mind?

I have used Ventura Publisher since version 1.1, and own version 2.0.  My 
wife is currently using version 3.0 on a contract, and version 2.0 at home.
When Ventura came out, I was quite taken with it.  However, I am very 
disappointed at the rate of develoment of this package.  Version 3 for the 
GEM interface is a legitimate upgrade but version 3 for Windows is basically 
a port of 2.0 with a few enhancements to use Windows features.  Because I 
am dissatisfied with Xerox'es rate of development of Ventura, I have chosen 
not to buy the latest upgrade; likely we will abandon use of Ventura when 
superior packages are ported to the DOS/Windows environment.  We have 
temporarily adopted the use of Word for Windows for some PC documentation.

On the other hand, you can't exactly say that troff has made great strides 
in development, either.  Troff is not WYSYWIG, unless you want a complex 
superset of what most people think of as troff.  I would consider a 
combination of a good ASCII editor and Ventura a superior solution to the 
combination of that good ASCII editor and troff, IF the platform is 
irrelevant.  Really, the hardware you are using will make a big difference 
in your decision.

I had very good luck writing and editing primarily in microemacs, and 
adjusting layout and format using Ventura.  I still work this way when 
I use Ventura; I always save my documents as ASCII files.  It was actually 
easier for me to develop tables in emacs than in Ventura... On the other 
hand, my wife usually writes in Word and then formats in Ventura.  Ventura
handles different document formats pretty well, and I have on occasion  
used it as a document conversion tool with moderate efficiency.  

I have not used the Professional Extensions package for Ventura (basically 
included in the 3.0 version for GEM, and there are also third-party vendors 
that provide things like advanced tablemaking... 

My basic advice is to lean toward Ventura if you are PC-oriented, and 
toward troff if you are Unix-oriented.  There are a lot of short-comings 
to both approaches, but a troff dot-jockey can probably accomplish a lot 
more ultimately than a Ventura wizard can.

Final comment:  If you can get a manual in Ventura form, you can probably 
also ask for it in Word form, or Xywrite, or ...  Your choices may be 
broader than you thought.

-lar
-- 
Lar Kaufman            I would feel more optimistic about a bright future
(voice) 512-794-9070   for man if he spent less time proving that he can
(fax)   512-794-0623   outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness 
lark@tivoli.com        and respecting her seniority.  - E.B. White