[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Groff] RE: Groff editor.
From: |
karee |
Subject: |
[Groff] RE: Groff editor. |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Aug 2007 07:54:23 -0700 (PDT) |
There are some tools on www.snake.net/software which can convert troff2rtf
and rtf2troff.
I hope they work for the groff too, may be i can use it ? any suggestions ?
Thanks,
Srini
Meg McRoberts wrote:
>
> My current job requires writing long, highly-technical documents in
> Word and it is absolutely HORRID! I totally agree with you!
>
> I've seen editors for HTML and XML where you have two windows, one
> that contains the raw source and one that contains a reasonably-accurate
> rendition of the formatted text. You can edit in either pane and the
> results are displayed to the other. This seems like a reasonable
> compromise between people who prefer the raw text format (like most
> of us on this list) and those who prefer the WYSIWYG approach.
>
> --- Nick Stoughton <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 14:11 -0400, Karee, Srinivas wrote:
>> > Basically I cannot lose bold/italic/font and other stuff.
>>
>> The issue here for me is about the "meta-information". I have a 4,000
>> page document that describes programming APIs. The fact that a function
>> name is in italics with () after it is of much less importance to me
>> than the fact that I'm talking about a function here, which is something
>> that will appear in the index, etc etc. And when I describe a symbolic
>> constant, it comes out in ALL CAPS and in Courier-Roman font, but as far
>> as I'm concerned, I'm just describing a constant. I don't care what it
>> looks like until the very last moment when it gets rendered for the
>> reader.
>>
>> This is one of the things I hate about WYSIWYG editors ... it is all
>> about the rendering, and not about the content.
>>
>> Both groff and docbook-XML give me this level of abstraction when I'm
>> dealing with the source of a document. Word does not.
>>
>> So, my real question, I guess, is do you care only about the
>> bold/italic/font information, or do you care about the meaning (and
>> possible other side effects, such as indexing) behind the font?
>> --
>> Nick Stoughton <address@hidden>
>> USENIX
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Groff-editor.-tf4286748.html#a12256312
Sent from the Groff - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., (continued)
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., Meg McRoberts, 2007/08/20
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., Karee, Srinivas, 2007/08/20
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., Meg McRoberts, 2007/08/20
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., Karee, Srinivas, 2007/08/20
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., Meg McRoberts, 2007/08/20
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., brian m. carlson, 2007/08/21
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., Nick Stoughton, 2007/08/20
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., Karee, Srinivas, 2007/08/20
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., Larry Kollar, 2007/08/25
- RE: [Groff] Groff editor., Meg McRoberts, 2007/08/20
- [Groff] RE: Groff editor.,
karee <=
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., Clarke Echols, 2007/08/21
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., Keith Marshall, 2007/08/21
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., Ted Harding, 2007/08/20
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., Clarke Echols, 2007/08/20
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., Ted Harding, 2007/08/20
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., Gunnar Ritter, 2007/08/20
- Re: [Groff] Groff editor., Ted Harding, 2007/08/20