Error - template LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER template could not be found.

Error - template STYLE-SHEET not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the STYLE-SHEET template could not be found.

Error - template SUB-TOP-BANNER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the SUB-TOP-BANNER template could not be found.
Subject:
From:
Dave Gillett <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
PCSOFT - Personal Computer software discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 29 Sep 1999 17:17:28 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
On 29 Sep 99, at 0:12, Jim Meagher wrote:

> Yeeeears ago everyone used a program called WordStar.  It was THE
> word processor.

  I still miss the way WordStar did block moves.  Cut/Copy/Paste are
good primitives to build in implementing a test editor, but I'm not
certain I agree that therefore they are what the user interface
should look like.

> It has a system of embedding format codes directly into the text
> using what we all "lovingly" called dot and double-dot commands.
> These were strange and cryptic combinations of letters and numbers
> that represented the commands for how we wanted the printed output
> to look.

  Actually, I think the dot (although perhaps not the double-dot)
commands go back to a family of even-earlier "output formatter"
packages:  roff, nroff, troff, groff, proff, and so on.  The idea
that the program that you used to edit the text -- and to insert
these codes -- would ALSO do the formatting and printing was still
rather new-fangled when WordStar came along.

  None of which alters your point:

> I tell my students, that it is not necessary to understand the
> theory of the internal combustion engine in order to drive a car,
> but it IS handy to know what's under the hood (bonnet for those of
> you across the pond <grin>), how to check the oil, and water, and
> other fluids.  And I beleive the same holds true for HTML.  It is
> good to have a basic understanding, but with the high level of
> sophistication of today's graphic based tools.... well... how
> deeply you get involved in learning HTML is a subjective decision.

  This is my feeling, too.  I've written tools that needed to parse
HTML documents, and obviously this requires some detailed knowledge --
 but most people will never need to do that sort of thing.  You can
write better C code if you know some assembler, and better MFC
applications if you know the Windows APIs, but for most people
something less than expertise is more than sufficient.

David G

                PCSOFT mailing list is brought to you by:
                         The NOSPIN Group, Inc.
                  http://nospin.com - http://nospin.org

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV