Re: DSSSL and WYSIWYG Editing

Daniel Veillard wrote:

> >I would expect that users will not edit in a fully WYSIWYG
> environment.
> >This is the case in either CSS, DSSSL or any other style sheet
> language.
> >Some style sheet languages may not give you the capability to
> reorganize
> >content but all allow you to make content disappear. The usability
> >problems caused by this are exactly the same as those caused by
> >reorganized information. "Where did my element go? I typed it in,
> >updated the display and it disappeared!" This is a problem even in
> >traditional word processors. They also have style sheets that can
> make
> >content disappear.
>   A very simple solution to this problem is to have a multi-view
> editor.
> For example in Amaya there is a WYSIWYG view as well as a structure
> view
> showing the content. The styles only applies to the WYSIWYG view. So
> one
> can always check that the content is correct. An alternate view also
> provide an way to see how the document would render on a text
> terminal.
> Daniel

IMHO, people who are SGML-literate are more comfortable with structured
views of documents. Mere mortals(tm) seem frightened and confused by
structured views.

So my question -- how do you give the power of style sheets to the
masses? Multiple views of documents are bound to confuse the person who
just wants to write a document and have it look "correct." Sure, the
power user doesn't mind previewing his or her document to test a script,
but the power user is trying to solve a very different problem.

I think very complex layout, complete with attributed content can be
provided without forcing the user to think structure, scripts or
schemes.. ( I know because I worked on such a product in a past life.)


Greg Kostello                        mailto://kostello@digitalstyle.com
DigitalStyle Corporation                   http://www.digitalstyle.com/
10875 Rancho Bernardo Road, Suite 110             voice: (619) 618-2222
San Diego, CA 92127                                 fax: (619) 673-5054

Follow-Ups: References: