Subject: Re: [lojban] Group Document Editing?

From: Jay Kominek <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 16:06:42 -0600 (MDT)

On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Robert J. Chassell wrote:

> TeXinfo isn't terribly manipulable, IMO, but easy enough to output, I
> should think.
>
> You are right, it is easy to output. What I am curious about is your
> comment that it "isn't terribly manipulable".

I think you went off in the wrong direction. :)

What I meant was that I wouldn't want to have to parse TeXinfo everytime I
wanted to load the database.

Sure, it'd be easier than parsing free-form TeXinfo since presumably I'd
be parsing something I'd output myself, so it'd be a matter of regular
expressions, but why even have to do that much when one could store the
data in, say, a Perl data structure that you require in (I like Perl, in
case the list population had not yet noticed), or simply in a SQL
database. (Or maybe C structs that you write(2) straight out, or
serialized Java objects.)

> [... Discussion of why TeXinfo is The Thing To Use ...]

Should I write this web editable dictionary thing (I've not seen any mail
public or private from people telling me that they're interested in using
it and that it'll be the greatest thing since store-bought sliced bread :)
then I'll probably make some effort to provide the output in every format
which the combination of a Perl script and an external utility can
provide. (Docbook, HTML, ASCII, TeXInfo, PDF, PS, RTF(?), XML, etc,
etc...)

- Jay Kominek <[email-masked]>
X is the second worst windowing system in the
world, but all the others are tied for first.