RE: GUI for Lout

[Tim Churches]

Err, its actually Steven Baker (from Debian?) who is proposing a Lout GUI, not 
me.

I've also been using Lyx and am also very impressed by it. Actually, we 
generate statistical reports marked up in DocBook, convert that to Lyx using 
sgml-tools and then add commentary text in Lyx. I'm not so impressed by the 
quality of LaTex as a back-end. Lout would be much nicer.

Tim C

>===== Original Message From Gordon Deane <address@hidden> =====
>Hi,
>I'd like to encourage Tim in his project, but also to sound a caution:
>a document editor is a big project, and you don't want to re-invent more
>wheels than necessary.
> - look at what others have tried to do here beforehand
> - look carefully at LyX
>In particular, I have been thinking a bit about how to add Lout export to
>LyX itself.
>
>I have been writing stuff in Lout by hand for some time (one of these days
>I'll clean up and release my XEmacs mode, which works quite well). But, I
>am currently writing an honours thesis in LaTex.  I found writing *TeX by
>hand painful and complicated after Lout, and have ended up using LyX. I am
>very impressed with it - anyone thinking of writing a similar program
>should certainly use LyX for a bit to get some ideas.
>
>Of note: LyX is currently moving to remove the dependence on the
>non-free XForms library, and there has been some work on allowing it to
>write DocBook documents.  (Internally, LyX uses and saves in its own
>format, although it both exports and imports LaTex)
>
>I suspect that a Lout export filter would be straightforward and work for
>about 80% of things.  Equations would be harder.  I have also found that
>one requires a great deal of embedded literal TeX that is v. hard to
>translate [you will always want this, for things that markup does better];
>ideally, one could start a new document with a 'Lout template' and just
>embed literal Lout instead.  Of course, TeX-ish assumptions are probably
>very deep in the code, but at the same time, LyX is a fairly substantial
>product already.
>
>Anyway, far be it from me to knock your project, Tim; best of luck!  I'd
>certainly be keen to use a graphical front-end with Lout. (Next thesis,
>maybe :-)
>
>Yours sincerely,
>Gordon
>
>--
>                       Gordon Deane <address@hidden>
>Sherlock Holmes cooking:
>"When you have eliminated everything else in the pantry, then whatever
>remains, however improbable, must become tonight's dinner."
>
>On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, Tim Churches wrote:
>
>> Steven,
>>
>> A graphical front-end for Lout in the style of Lyx would be most welcome. A
>> bonus if it is implemented in Python (go Python!). However, the other 
missing
>> part of the Lout jigsaw is conversion from SGML/XML (in particular DocBook 
for
>> my purposes) to Lout. The SGML-Tools-x packages don't seem to emit Lout, 
and I
>> can't find any DSSSL or XSL stylesheets which produce Lout either.
>>
>> Tim Churches
>>
>> >===== Original Message From Steven Baker <address@hidden> =====
>> >I am currently in the design process of a WYSIWYG editor for Lout
>> >which will most likely be written in Python.  I know this is
>> >controversial for some, but as much as I like to write my own Lout
>> >documents by hand, it is sometimes nicer to be able to see things
>> >right away and not worry about formatting---especially for shorter
>> >texts such as letters, or most of my homework.