Nik wrote: >I'll try to explain my view here: > >One of the reasons that WP is so popular is that a generation of computer >users found Word ready-installed on their computers, and learned to use it. >For better or worse (and I believe, much worse, in fact) this is the default >way most users create a computer document these days. > > I agree. Truth is, though, that this (broken) system is all most people want. And it will be many, many years before you overturn this WP model.
>In fact, I too would be aghast if my favourite DTP starting exhibiting WP-like >failings. However, a single simple tool that didn't require me to use both a >(broken) WP, and a DTP to produce useful output would be a very desirable >tool. > > I think the proper solution might be a fully functional module--that is, turning the current Story Editor in something much grander. This may be a hard sell, though. It would mean marrying a WP/DTP-cross module into the actual DTP, I would think. And then there are spreadsheets, tables, etc. When does the list stop? I would still argue the separation of the two. Not to say a more powerful Story Editor would be a bad thing, but let's not divert energies away from Scribus' core DTP development. Just my humble 1.5c. Drat, .6c after taxes! ;-) Rainer
