Re: Please brainstorm: Word-processor compatible with version control
>
>
>
>---- Original Message ----
>From: ron.l.johnson@cox.net
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: Please brainstorm: Word-processor compatible with
>version control
>Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:20:26 -0600
>
>>On 02/10/2009 12:59 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>>> I'd like a word processor compatible with version control systems
>>> (hereafter abbreviated VCS) Having been duly impressed for
>decades now
>>> how useful VCSs are for programming, I'd like to use them for
>writing as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> I use monotone as my VCS. but I don't suppose my trials are unique
>to
>>> monotone.
>>>
>>> There are a few other requirements, too, such as ability to export
>to
>>> file formats often demanded by publishers (such as pdf, Word, and
>plain
>>> ASCII text)
>>
>>AbiWord's XML is probably close to what you want.
>>
>>> Here are more details. Most of the problems is that the file
>formats
>>> inflate tiny changes to huge changes.
>>>
>>> (1) When I arrive at two versions of a document (maybe one has
>spelling
>>> error corrected, and the other is rewritten from a different POV),
>I'd
>>> like to be able to merge the changes. Now often there are
>one-word
>>> changes that appear on the same line of text. Conventional merge
>tools
>>> just register this as a conflict, even though it's trivial to
>resolve.
>>> THis is because VCS's tend to be line-oriented.
>>
>>A user might want to, for example, change the margins, or convert
>>from single-column to multi-column. That's why
>>single-line-per-paragraph is so useful.
>>
>>> (2) Word processors tend to insert an overkill of layout
>information.
>>> Often a simple change of layout policy causes every line of the
>text to
>>> be changed, leaving proper merging hopeless. In the past, Abiword
>
>>> suffered form this. I have no idea if it still does. Precise
>layout
>>> information belongs in a style sheet, not in the main text. I
>thought
>>> this was understood since the days of SGML.
>>
>>I think it still does. But a line in a paragraph, so maybe it's
>>better now?
>>
>>> (3) Word processors that leave text in a human-readable form
>(properly
>>> word-wrapped, for example) cause insertion of a single character
>(such as
>>> a spelling change) to affect the layout of entire paragraphs.
>>>
>>> (4) Word processors that use a binary file format are hopelessly
>>> inaccessible to a VCS. Word and WordPerfect are examples of this.
> So is
>>> the ODT file format used by Open Office.
>>
>>ODT is zipped XML. Otherwise, they'd be *huge*.
>>
>>> I'm currently using an ad-hoc notation in UTF-8, edited in emacs,
>>> formatted by homebrew code. I'm careful never to change the
>source
>>> layout significantly while editing, but even so I have trouble
>merging
>>> multiple independent changes within a line. Breaking it all up
>into a
>>> sequence of one-word lines is technically feasible,m and will work
>with
>>> most VCS's, but is a holeless way to edit.
>>>
>>> I suspect I'll be able to hack up something to export to *some* of
>the
>>> more conventional file-formats. I'm alreday producing Postscript
>my
>>> printer will take, and a weird mark-up that cuts and pastes well
>into
>>> Livejournal.
>>>
>>> Isn't there something that already does most of what I really
>need?
>>
>>I'd take another look at AbiWord. And maybe file a couple of
>>specific bugs against it regarding integration with VCS.
>>
>>--
>>Ron Johnson, Jr.
>>Jefferson LA USA
>>
>>Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification
>>
There was an old (and perhaps updated) UNIX package called writer's
work bench, written by Lorinda Cherry I believe
Larry
>>
>>--
>>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
>>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.d
>ebian.org
>>
>>
>>
Reply to: