Re: Emacs/Publishing/WYSIWYG

[Tim Johnson]

* ken <gebser@mousecar.com> [180530 10:58]:
> On 05/30/2018 12:58 PM, Bob Newell wrote:
> > The advantages of plain text are hard to overstate, as is the
> > advantage of having everything from plot notes to research material in
> > a single (large) file under version control. And building up a novel
> > from an outline is a natural process with org-mode.
> 
> 
> Yes to all, except... I tried org-mode a few years ago and found it
> often limiting and sometimes difficult to fathom, the latter mostly due
> to geekified terminology. So I stayed with html (along with CSS, of
> course).  Why should I write in something that can be converted into
> html, when I can write in html directly?  There are many reasons why I
> prefer html (I use html-helper-mode) over org-mode, but a major
> consideration is that the Kindle publishing language is essentially
> html, in ways a subset of it, with a few Kindle-proprietary html tags
> tossed in.
> 
> Just thought I'd toss in another option.
> 
> Whatever your favorite flavor-mode, it's nice to see authors using emacs.
  I'm willing to roll up my sleeves are take on org-mode. 
  
  Having said that, when ken refers to "geekified terminology" it
  brings up what has been a pet peeve of mine for decades: The use
  of domain-specific terminology for various software systems. 
  
  Oftentimes, interpreting the terminology is half of the effort I
  make to learn a new system.

-- 
Tim Johnson
http://www.tj49.com