🚀 go-pugleaf

> the latest and best professional typographic systems contain as many
> WYSIWYG functions as the programmers can cram in.  These SPECIFICALLY include
> the ability to box and columnarize text in tabular formats, as in cookbooks, 

Ed, could you be more specific about which typographic systems you're
referring to? The systems I have seen more resemble previewing systems
than WYSIWYG systems. I don't think there are many professional
typographic systems that rival TeX and troff for power. Admittedly,
the results of TeX and troff are not of "graphics arts quality". It's
true that graphic arts and typesetting professionals have high demands,
but the methods they use are pretty primative (not crude, but low-level).

> From my limited experience dealing with "computer novices" in the graphic
> arts -- who do not refer to us as "graphic-arts novices," though they could --

I doubt that computer people are more elitist than graphics arts people.
I suspect that we don't even rate as novices in the opinion of many
graphics arts professionals.

> This would perhaps be more convincing had the author not written an embedded
> command text formatting program.

I am sure he would rather have an interactive WYSIWYG system, if it would do
what he wants with resonable speed.
--
James Lee Johnson, U.T. Computation Center, Austin, Texas 78712
ARPA:  jjhnsn@ut-ngp.UTEXAS.EDU
UUCP:  ihnp4!ut-ngp!jjhnsn  allegra!ut-ngp!jjhnsn  gatech!ut-ngp!jjhnsn
       seismo!ut-sally!jjhnsn  harvard!ut-sally!jjhnsn