Leslie Bialler wrote: >In which R. Tenenbaum, Tennenbaum. >seizing upon this statement of >Leslie Bialler: ≫ ≫ >. . . But the Tech Group would probably sue your butt off if you tried ≫ >to do that w/o their permission, which they'd probably not grant. Can't ≫ >say that I I'd blame them, either. ≫ > >goes on to make certain assertions, assumptions, and declarations that >provoke >further comments on the part of L. Bialler. To wit: > >RT: > ≫ I hold TTG personally responsible for most of what's wrong in the ≫ world. > >LB: > >You are _not_ charming when you're being grandiose. You're clearly an expert on that quality, so I defer. Sorry. > >AND SO FORTH: ≫ ≫ What's disinctively copyrightable about Xywrite? The command line? ≫ Hardly. The mnemonics? Arguably. The double-chevroned formatting ≫ markers? Probably. > >I would imagine the look and feel is copyrightable. Other than that, I >could not possibly say, being neither a lawyer nor fat. Thanks for pointing that out. IANAL, either, but if there were something copyrightable about a command line over a text field about a million applications from CICS to Excel would be trapped in lawsuits. >And the cost of defending oneself against a suit, even if one prevailed >in the end, would not be inconsiderable. > >So I guess the would-be developer of the XyWrite emulator would have to >ask himself this question: "Do you feel lucky?" I don't think you've identified what is copyrightable about Xywrite, except to say "look and feel" again. If your point was, "I don't know what's legally distinctive about Xywrite, but someone might get sued for emulating it, so he'd better not," you've made it well, but if I'm missing something non-trivial to this point please explain again. ≫ ≫ The secret to doing this, I believe, would be improving that which has ≫ been begging to be improved about *something like Xywrite* while ≫ retaining what makes it so good. ≫ > >Unclear. You wish to create "something like XyWrite" that would contain >improvements while retaining what makes it good. That about it? If so, I >vote yea, >and without objection ask permission to move on. > ≫ Let's take for example, the chevrons, which long ago should have been ≫ got rid of in favor of SGML-functional delimiters. > >Really? What do you imagine would be gained by this procedure? 1) A broadening of the appeal of an application whose niche right now is so small you can hardly see it. 2) Moving word processing towards something which resembles a genuine standard, as opposed to the presently dominant one which makes a joke of standards. ≫ To me what ≫ distinguishes Xy -- even more than the command line, or even its ≫ splendid customizability -- is the ability to edit and review in either ≫ expanded or regular view. SGML and its niece, HTML, are in a way ≫ knockoffs of Xy/Atex formatting. > >A dubious statement. Actually I believe that the folks who came up with SGML were in fact inspired by Xywrite but I may be mistaken. One might argue more profitably (although I would >prefer not to) >that SGML/HTML might well have adopted XyWrite's "format stays until >replaced by next one" system rather than the clumsier. > >blahblahblahblahyaddayaddayadda
> >all work and no play makes jack a dull boy
>that SGML does in fact require. I'm sorry, I'm missing something here, the example confuses me a little bit (is paragraph, no?) Inasmuch as I think I know what you're getting at, in a perfect world the Xywrite way of doing things -- default is simplest and plain best; margins are as set in startup.int, generating plain text. However if we grant that even within Xywrite there's a need for formatting, but using symbols we can edit and change manually and simply, why not just use these <> instead of these≪≫? Again if you weren't using Xy code, the simple fact you were using a command line to enter these strings in a text window wouldn't be enough for TTG to sue you. > ≫ Maybe the thing could turn into the ≫ premier HTML composing tool. > >A simple XPL routine can handle that chore. One need only replace >XyWrite ≪US≫ tags and ≪MDLL≫ tags with the proper SGML tags, taking >into account that each
must be cancelled by an appropriate . >Such a routine can be accomplished with the workmanlike string of CI's, >although with time and the river flowing more elegant XPL solutions can >doubtless be achieved. Who said such chores can't be handled in Xywrite, I do them on a daily basis. It's an idea. A sort of intellectual exercise: what could there be in a great word processor that those of us who like Xywrite would be willing to use that might have a chance of existing without infringing on any of TTG's intellectual property? You don't have to play if you don't want to, you know. ≫ Besides, whoever made such an animal could give it away ≫ and still make a fortune > >A rather paradoxical assertion. Not going to get into that now. ≫ -- might stand a chance of bringing us back to ≫ ascii where we belong. And make the world a better place. ≫ > >I assume this is meant as hyperbole. or this either but thanks! Rafe T. raphaelt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.ray-field.com