Jonathan Edwards >> subtext
[1/5] from: jasonic::nomadics::org at: 27-Jan-2005 0:00
Rebolers all will appreciate this...
http://subtextual.org/
Subtext - Uncovering the simplicity of programming
Jonathan Edwards screencast presentation
http://subtextual.org/demo1.html
enjoy !
Jason
[2/5] from: carl::cybercraft::co::nz at: 27-Jan-2005 11:06
On Thursday, 27-January-2005 at 0:00:21 you wrote,
>Rebolers all will appreciate this...
>
>http://subtextual.org/
>
>Subtext - Uncovering the simplicity of programming
>
>Jonathan Edwards screencast presentation
>http://subtextual.org/demo1.html
Text is a dead-end
Programming is stuck in an evolutionary dead-end: the use of character strings to encode
programs. Every other computer-mediated form of expression has evolved beyond text into
sophisticated WYSIWYG interfaces to complex data structures. For example, no one still
uses textual markup for word processing (except, notably, Computer Scientists with TeX).
We need WYSIWYG programming."
I've stopped thinking that way - text is cool. Consider Web Design. Someone hits a
problem using their sophisticated WYSIWYG behemoth of a program and asks you for help.
But you use a different behemoth of a program to design your websites - end of discussion.
If you were both working at the HTML level though, you'd not only be on the same wavelength
but you could also look at their HTML as well - which is a pointless exercise with the
sophisticated WYSIWYG behemoths.
-- Carl Read.
[3/5] from: jasonic::nomadics::org at: 27-Jan-2005 10:52
Hi Carl
----- Original Message -----
I've stopped thinking that way - text is cool. Consider Web Design.
Someone hits a problem using their sophisticated WYSIWYG behemoth of a
program and asks you for help. But you use a different behemoth of a
program to design your websites - end of discussion. If you were both
working at the HTML level though, you'd not only be on the same wavelength
but you could also look at their HTML as well - which is a pointless
exercise with the sophisticated WYSIWYG behemoths.
-- Carl Read.
yeah .... 'Text is Dead <<>>> Long Live Text'
I like text too - just like I love books!
Of course it's not going away, but there is always room and need for some
other paradigms and original exploratoin
Any such extreme pov is bound to be wrong for some people.
For Edwards he needs to be reaching for something.
Carl S. says email is 'dead' but we all use it still etc.
Object-oriented programming and XML are 'dead' even as they grow daily
The most relveant aspects of Jonathan Edwards "subtext" that I thought you
all might appreciate are:
- courage in really trying to rethink things with orginality and insight.
- miinmalism and simplicity [how successful yet remains to be seen]
- If you follow his screencast something very Rebol like begins to emerge
That last points is the one I thought you'd most enjoy
The best example I can find of a median between your reaction and 'substext'
is Edward Ream's LEO
http://leo.sf.net
Jason
[4/5] from: premshree:pillai:gm:ail at: 27-Jan-2005 15:53
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:52:18 +0100, Jason Cunliffe <jasonic-nomadics.org> wrote:
> Hi Carl
> ----- Original Message -----
<<quoted lines omitted: 14>>
> Carl S. says email is 'dead' but we all use it still etc.
> Object-oriented programming and XML are 'dead' even as they grow daily
I don't think he meant XML is dead in the context that you probably
mean here. There _is_ a need for representing semantic information;
what Carl probably meant was that maybe XML is not that format.
> The most relveant aspects of Jonathan Edwards "subtext" that I thought you
> all might appreciate are:
>
> - courage in really trying to rethink things with orginality and insight.
> - miinmalism and simplicity [how successful yet remains to be seen]
> - If you follow his screencast something very Rebol like begins to emerge
It looks interesting... however, I wonder if full-fledged applications
could be written using such a concept -- especially enterprise-grade
applications, that require collaboration and suchlike.
- Show quoted text -
> That last points is the one I thought you'd most enjoy
> The best example I can find of a median between your reaction and 'substext'
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to rebol-request
> at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
--
Premshree Pillai
http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree
[5/5] from: premshree::pillai::gmail::com at: 27-Jan-2005 15:42
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:52:18 +0100, Jason Cunliffe <[jasonic--nomadics--org]> wrote:
> Hi Carl
> ----- Original Message -----
<<quoted lines omitted: 14>>
> Carl S. says email is 'dead' but we all use it still etc.
> Object-oriented programming and XML are 'dead' even as they grow daily
I don't think he meant XML is dead in the context that you probably
mean here. There _is_ a need for representing semantic information;
what Carl probably meant was that maybe XML is not that format.
> The most relveant aspects of Jonathan Edwards "subtext" that I thought you
> all might appreciate are:
>
> - courage in really trying to rethink things with orginality and insight.
> - miinmalism and simplicity [how successful yet remains to be seen]
> - If you follow his screencast something very Rebol like begins to emerge
It looks interesting... however, I wonder if full-fledged applications
could be written using such a concept -- especially enterprise-grade
applications, that require collaboration and suchlike.
> That last points is the one I thought you'd most enjoy
> The best example I can find of a median between your reaction and 'substext'
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to rebol-request
> at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
--
Premshree Pillai
http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted