Thomas, On Tuesday 21 February 2006 06:39, T. Ribbrock wrote:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 06:10:19AM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
...
And it definitely is WYSIWYG, it's just not WYSIWTG (... They Get). As one person pointed out in something I read several years ago, WYSIWYG should really be called WYSIAYG (... All You Get). WYSIWYG seemed pretty cool when GUI-based personal computers came to electronic publishing (before which it was stuff like the roff family of processors and other varieties of overt mark-up), but it's an impoverished model for real publishing, suitable only for small-scale works and one-off tasks.
I reckon that's one of the reasons why LaTeX is still pretty much alive, fortunately. BTW: Wasn't it LaTeX -> LyX that came up with "WYSIWYM" (... You Mean) - I always loved that approach.
TeX and its various macro packages and support tools is _very_ much alive! Academic publishing would be paralyzed without it and they'd simply have to reinvent it were it to somehow disappear. TeX's handling of formulas is superb (probably unsurpassed in any other document preparation software), and highly valued by researchers in scientific and mathematic disciplines.
Regards,
Thomas
Randall Schulz