Re: cross-references explained

[Bill Troop bill@xxxxxxxx]

> BUT I have just been negotiating the publication of a book with
> Yale University Press. I find, to my amazement and pleasure, that
> the program they use is (a roll of the drums) XyWrite! Yes, if
> you submit in Word, *they* convert to XyWrite. If you submit in
> XY, or conceivably in NB, they will be as happy as you are. As
> for what version they use, I don't know, but will shortly.
Thank heavens there are still some sane people around; and some XyWrite
users beyond our little circle (probably, indeed, much more than we think).
But what to they do next? Do they import into Quark? Quark 3 had a great
XyWrite filter, but Quark 4 does not. I still use both. If one doesn't work
for a file, the other one usually will. Or do they use some other page
layout software? I have always thought that XyWrite should have been
converted into a simple page layout program -- and the one time I spoke to
Ken Frank years ago, I proposed this idea to him, and he was receptive. But
it didn't go anywhere. But . . . if XyWrite were customized to work partly
as a front end, partly as a companion, and partly as a low-level
replacement for Quark -- couldn't that work? Isn't there a great need for
relatively simple typesetting software -- something with much more DTP
power than XyWrite or Word, but still much less than Quark? And it would be
so much better suited to much trade publishing than the DTP programs we
have today. But perhaps this integrative idea of mine doesn't really make
sense, and we are better off with the more specialized software we now have?
Still . . . a XyWrite which respected kerning tables in fonts; a Xywrite
with Quark-style tracking and leading --- aren't there some possibilities
there?