[TUHS] Re: Proliferation of book print styles

[Stuff Received <stuff@riddermarkfarm.ca>]

On 2024-06-02 08:39, Douglas McIlroy wrote (in part):

> Perhaps the question you meant to ask was whether we were surprised when 
> WYSIWYG took over word-processing for the masses. No, we weren't, but we 
> weren't attracted to it either, because it sacrificed markup's potential 
> for expressing the logical structure of documents and thus fostering 
> portability of text among distinct physical forms, e.g. man pages on 
> terminals and in book form or  technical papers as TMs and as journal 
> articles. WYSIWYG was also unsuitable for typesetting math. (Microsoft 
> Word clumsily diverts to a separate markup pane for math.)

I liken suffering through WYSIWYG for math to searching through drawers 
of movable type pieces for the desired piece.

Some time ago, I read a nice article titled "What you see is all you 
get" but I cannot find the link (and Google fails me miserably).  Found 
this, though: What has WSYIWYG done for us: 
https://web.archive.org/web/20050207015413/http://www.ideography.co.uk/library/seybold/WYSIWYG.html

S.