At 06:38 AM 5/12/2004, David wrote:
Actually I'm horrified that anyone would _want_ to edit the document in
its expanded form with all cross references etc explict. I've not used
such a primitive authoring environment since at least the early eighties
Wouldn't your users have a more pleasant experience if they could author
an xml source and just use named links and xrefs and just "know" that
the system will generate a correctly linked/numbered document at the end
rather than in a system where they are looking at a link to "paragraph
2" which should now be paragraph 3 as something has been inserted?
As a couple of readers of this list recall, this was the exact issue
explored in an excellent session of Extreme Markup Languages last August in
Montreal.
It seems the problem reduces to the fact that some users like it the "right
way" (as David describes it), but others just cannot shake the expectations
of WYSIWYG, and have a terrible time working at a more abstract level even
when it's both more robust, and gives a better indication of what's
actually going on. It is tempting to think that well-designed UIs would
help, but mileage with them apparently varies quite a bit.
The care and feeding of users. Not a trivial problem.
Cheers,
Wendell
___&&__&_&___&_&__&&&__&_&__&__&&____&&_&___&__&_&&_____&__&__&&_____&_&&_
"Thus I make my own use of the telegraph, without consulting
the directors, like the sparrows, which I perceive use it
extensively for a perch." -- Thoreau