Hi there!
On 2 May 00, at 14:48, Steve Lamb wrote
about "Re: auto-format is too robotic isn't it?":
> Mistake #1. You're thinking that there are only lines. I see only data
> which can be represented any number of ways. Let's just say that just
> because the limitation exists when transmitting means that the limitation
> exists when creating. If that were the case, we would not have free caret
> mode since until I moved my cursor down and typed this word the spaces
> preceding this didn't exist. Therefore it is clear that TB! is able to
> represent the data in a manner, internally, which does defy the limitations
> of the transmit medium and, upon sending, can translate down to that >
> medium.
Mistake #1 on your side: you think plain ASCII is a limitation of some
(unknown to me) sort, whereas _I_ think ASCII is a _power_, a well-thought
standard that those guys who invented "soft returns" and things alike (read:
M$ with its Word and heaps of others) just plain spoiled. Well, it follows that
_your_ choice is Word's way of doing things, despite your dislike towards M$.
That's your choice, but let me think differently. There's _nothing_ in word-
processing world that cannot be done (and done _better_) with just plain
ASCII. Wanna examples? TeX for typesetting, HTML for web publishing. _No_
need in RTF, DOC, XLS, etc., etc., etc., etc.......
I'd prefer the editor NOT to use those soft returns at all. I do not use soft
returns in my work. I do not use Word and wordprocessors alike. And I'm still
alive, and my health is perfect;-)
> In short, there is not a Mmmmkaying thing stopping TB from having soft and
> hard breaks when editing which is the /only/ time our formatting comes into
> play.
Did you read what I had written? Was my English unclear? I said that this is a
matter of the quantities of programming work needed to implement it this or
that way.
> > But _if_ we consider the autoformat feature, we immediately need to
> > consider, how exactly should TB's editor decide, which block of text _is_ a
> > paragraph and which isn't.
>
> Simple. The block which is a paragraph is the one defined with a hard CR
> and the one that is not is defined with a soft CR. How TB! defines those is
> up to the internal logic which is, as I demonstrated, not limited to the logic
> of the transmit medium.
Then algorithms are necessary that convert one form to another and vice
versa. The implementation of the "soft-hard" way of editing from the ground
up. In short, you want the editor to be rewritten...
--
SY, Alex
(St.Petersburg, Russia)
http://mph.phys.spbu.ru/~akiselev
---
Thought for the day:
If it moves, salute it; if it doesn't move, pick it up;
if you can't pick it up, paint it.
---
PGP public keys on keyservers:
0xA2194BF9 (RSA); 0x214135A2 (DH/DSS)
fingerprints:
F222 4AEF EC9F 5FA6 7515 910A 2429 9CB1 (RSA)
A677 81C9 48CF 16D1 B589 9D33 E7D5 675F 2141 35A2 (DH/DSS)
---
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : [email protected]
