- "hypertext" describes a set of UI conventions. linking to things is not new
- rendering static documents is distinct from interactive dynamic ones
- forms are static documents
- rendering documents is not remotely related to their mode of transmission.
Post
Replies:
20
Boosts:
3
URL format? make it completely opaque
static document rendering is not an internet problem, nor a programming problem. everyone in the world who writes has a stake. every format i know of is unspecified and ascii-centric.
i think org could work. not forked—from scratch. i think attribute containers are a good model for various affordances. that the document is readable without highlighting makes me feel that it could be empowering to write a document that will continue to parse the same years later.
"text" is problematic. but structure and layout are distinct. so:
- structural ontology: spanning, anchoring, containment, metadata
- an ASCII "realization" associates each structure to a grammar model with ASCII tokens
from this, we render:
- page splitting/wrapping
- order and visibility of sections
- fontification
so a renderer can be hooked up to a graphics device etc
@vtrlx is there a structured document format you like? i have been convincing myself above that "plain text" can be contextually meaningful, and that structure is distinct from realization.
html technically has a "structure", but it's only made available in the js dom. html is also a google product.
i want a text format because:
- the user has access to the whole document contents
- i do not know of any attempt to distinguish structure and realization like this—this is also how i want my programming language to work
contra html, static and dynamic behavior are not the same. jarek duda tried really hard to make a use for wolfram's plotting widget, but scientific figures are static because they represent specific data. i believe dynamic layout is a much harder problem and overlaps very little with document structure.
i think every ui should be like a game ui. i think gamedevs have been working with graphics like i've worked with text. i fundamentally do not believe that dynamic content is a structured document.
servo's parallel layout engine: required a new language to do successfully. CSS evaluation is state-dependent, so parallelism is very hard.
ok, i'm not familiar enough yet here but i feel this works for now
what if your and my dynamic UI,,,,,
kissed each other in the vulkan API......
org-mode fucked up with the hierarchical sections. fucked it up more by using repeated ASCII *. complete waste of lexical syntax
- "hacker text format"
- is the structure hierarchical or good
- it's a good format sir
- dot jay peg
oh. another point (which latex demonstrates well):
- most layout is word flow
- some layout sections must support more precise arrangement conditions
i'm not quite sure here, but:
- i would very much like to avoid the "latex problem" and the "css problem"
- where because some feature necessitates pixel precision, the entire language must support same
perhaps a "layout graph" could describe pluggable structure, with each such structure supported by each renderer
the layout graph is distinct from a realization: each layout graph instance by the user uses the same delimiters, as per realization
i feel it must be deeply arrogant to forgo the entire web ui model, but i don't think a written document and a software interface are at all the same thing!!!
i don't think it was wrong to try that out. but also, the web was (as a product, with hypertext) very much intended to replace text. word processors used to be designed for experts, and expensive—HOLD THAT THOUGHT! https://www.csmonitor.com/1983/0720/072011.html
Yet there has come to be something human about typewriters. At least I am rather taken with the notion that Cummings, whose strange patterns of verse fairly fizz on the page, sat down to a foursquare upright like the one I was given by an old Marine Corps buddy from Maine. And that Plath called forth her dark muse on an almost playful little Hermes like the one I carried in my luggage for years.
this is incredible! each author—their own extension of arm and hand?
[voice wavering] what would it mean to have developed sylvia plath's preferred typewriter?
a typewriter is a very human machine. one wonders if cummings was encouraged to wander around the page because tab stops are essentially gundam power steering?
And suppose another Eugene O'Neill wrote another marathon Mourning Becomes Electra. Even if his wife had to type out six whole different versions, as Carlotta O'Neill complained that she did, there would not necessarily be any manuscript to tell the tale.
carlotta o'neill, i want you to know that i have heard you.
Those versions could all be invisibly stored on computer disks. Or one version could have been repeatedly modified without changing the whole thing each time, and only the final version might exist on disks.
i'm losing my fucking mind man
Something would be missing from the exhibition anyway. There would be no accompanying manuscripts with erasures, interlinings, and marginal notes to show the author at his craft.
erasures and interlinings might be fun artifacts, but to the author, they are noise. marginal notes though—metatextual notes to self—this is absolutely real
@hipsterelectron I've never bought into the idea that structure and layout are separable:
- page splitting is absolutely structural
- order of sections is structural (what would even justify reordering sections for display?)
- font selection (esp mono vs not) affects alignment, which affects semantics
@hipsterelectron zooko's triangle says "yip" imo.
