Message-ID:  <E0wfOkA-0000Uw-00@heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:42:20 -0000." 
              <199706211053.MAA10544@centre.univ-orleans.fr>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jun 1997 12:54:10 +0100
From: Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns@CL.CAM.AC.UK>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Subject:      Re: ideal future document processing
Status: R

Michel Lavaud writes:

> The structure of the document in its first stages is indicated
> with punctuation marks, and typesetting indications such as
> \smallskip, \hspace{2cm}, \bf or whatever extend the set of
> punctuation marks available, and provide a convenient visual way
> to refine the structure. This mimicks exactly what one does when
> writing an article by hand.

This is a wind-up, right?  Or do people _really_ do this sort of
thing?

The structure of a document is (for me) indicated in its first stages
by the text, pure and simple, together with whatever fundamental
layout is defined for the class of document I'm writing.  I find it
easier to concentrate on what I'm writing, that way.

As a final stage, I may tweak things with explicit layout
instructions, but *never* at the start.  This process is called
"editing".  I do quite a lot of that for things I've not myself
written, too   ;-)

R