• From: Peter Flynn <peter@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 22:05:53 +0000

On 14/01/2022 15:08, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen wrote:
[...]
> I don't remember anyone taking the view that tools would shield us
> from the markup.  Make it unnecessary to type all those keystrokes? 

In the early SGML days, yes. I had a project of scientists to support,
many of whose keyboard skills were minimal, and once they grokked SGML
(which I'm happy to say they did fairly fast, as their funding depended
on being able to submit reports in it :-) they loved the idea of </>

> Shield us from the markup?  Why would you want to shield
> someone from something valuable?

Because the average user thinks it's just meaningless gibberish getting
in the way of the text. At best, they think it's programming. Never
underestimate the demand for the Instant Textual Gratification provided
by word processors.

Peter

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Why is terseness of minimal importance?
    • From: Marcus Reichardt <u123724@g...>

• References:
  • Why is terseness of minimal importance?
    • From: Roger L Costello <costello@m...>
  • Re: Why is terseness of minimal importance?
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...>
  • Re: Why is terseness of minimal importance?
    • From: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@b...>