mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[Julien Frontisi <address@hidden>]

The fold filter will be a great tool for me.

I totally agree that manipulating TeXmacs files with shell scripts is the perverse way to go.

Scheme is the natural way to do it. The problem is that I don't know how to do it. Most end-users of TeXmacs 

(or at least those we hope to convert to TeXmacs) are likely to be as programming-language-illiterate as I am.

What I'm doing is very basic and accessible to many (besides, it could give ideas to some to rewrite this in Scheme).

This is obviously not the way to build The Ultimate Exercise Database but it gets sufficiently close (for the moment) to

fulfilling my needs. So I share...

Thanks

Julien

Le 10 juil. 2012 à 15:17, Sam Liddicott a écrit :

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Joris van der Hoeven <address@hidden> wrote:

...
The new functionality is on the SVN. If you want something else
or more, then I suggest to take a look at the 'dynamic-filter-buffer'
function in 'fold-edit.scm'. It is quite easy to write Scheme routines
that perform actions on a document, since TeXmacs documents are
naturally structured. In any case, this technique is probably
much easier than using external scripts.

Yet, I am not completely convinced that this way of doing things
is really the most natural.

With a texmacs document, scheme is the best way to manipulate and extract documents. I hesitate to say, but I feel that the scheme techniques will approach the capabilities of xpath and xlstproc. I will refrain for the rest of the year from mentioning how desirable texmacs would be as a general purpose extensible macro xml editor, combining svg, mathml, xhtml, with xslt and all the rest. I promise! (No more cork, portable document format, subject to xslt manipulation but with texmacs macro goodness - some of which could convert to css) anyway... I dream, but who has the time...there are even various scheme implementations in _javascript_ into which the macro language could be stuffed... ahh...

Sam