[Pharo-dev] TxText model
siguctua at gmail.com
Mon Apr 4 09:02:10 EDT 2016
On 4 April 2016 at 15:44, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2016-04-04 14:24 GMT+02:00 Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com>:
>> On 4 April 2016 at 14:28, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier at gmail.com>
>>> 2016-04-04 13:18 GMT+02:00 Stephan Eggermont <stephan at stack.nl>:
>>>> On 04-04-16 11:58, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>>>> Apart from being 'cool to have', full-fledged word processing is not a
>>>>> thing, that you dealing with on a daily basis in environment, like Pharo.
>>>> I'm sure that is the case for you. I wonder if that is the case for
>>>> many Pharo users.
>>>> AFAIK there are a lot of pillar users.
>>> If it is for Pillar, then you don't really need a full-fledged, paper
>>> oriented layout engine. A web-like layout environment is probably enough,
>>> and much less costly to build.
>> Now count, how much world-wide resources are dedicated to web-based and
>> browser-based technology development and compare with our resource base. I
>> think it is foolish to set an unrealistic goals.
> I think that if we didn't have unrealistic goals, we wouldn't be in that
> community :)
>>> For me the problem with the TxText model is that it blocks the
>>>> possibility of doing
>>>> that later, if and when there is enough development capacity to invest
>>>> in this.
>>> There is enough technology in the Pharo universe to do it (or at least
>>> something approaching). Sometimes, what you need is the ideas / the
>>> rationale from a project to do it. And I do believe TxText has some of it,
>>> even if you consider that TxText can't be extended to do it (and I'll
>>> consider that you are right on this).
>>> Now, it's on nobody's roadmap, so it may take a while to emerge (if it
>>> does at all).
>>> Last time, i installed LaTex package on my mac, it took maybe hour or
>> so.. About 1Gb of files, tools, compilers, GUI, text editors..
>> Now think, how much years it would take to get remotely close to such
>> level of development? And where are those people or money that would allow
>> us to think this is viable path and we should throw everything into it to
>> get there?
> Have you really looked into what is the core of the TeX algorithm? The
> fact that an interactive version of it was done multiple times in history?
> (Self / InterViews to cite the ones I know and have used)
>> It is nice to dream time to time, but let us be realistic.
> I'd say that we have an environment where we can dream; where reinventions
> can be done at low cost (or at lower cost than others), that we can even
> afford to be wrong and throw a project away. Otherwise we wouldn't have
> Athens / TxText / GT ...
> Mind you, I'm not asking you to do it :) I simply know that some of TxText
> stuff is usable in that context. And that given the goal, shortcuts are
But do you realising that we talking here about different scales of things?
Let me drive an analogy:
- you found an engineer that created a rocket engine in his garage.
Engine is perfect, stable, works well etc etc etc..
And you asking him:
- can we fly to the Moon tomorrow?
Okay, if you find specialist, who can plan the mission, find the producer
of solar panels, find specialist of long range communications, find
specialists of long-range observations to determine the landing site, find
god know how many other specialist and experts in various areas, only then
you could possibly find and answer to your question.
But asking such question to just a rocket engine specialist.. is just
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-dev