On Sun 2002-11-24 (21:27), Anthony B. Coates wrote:
> ** Reply to message from "Bill Page" <bill.page1@...> on Sun, 24 Nov
> 2002 15:00:24 -0500
>
> A couple of things. TeXmacs looks nice. I wish I had as nice a front end for
> xmLP. I've often felt that the lack of nice front-ends has hurt the take-up
of
> LitProg (& Emacs does not count as a nice front-end, not for the 95%
majority).
> An ideal LitProg editor would be WYSIWYG, so that what you see when editing is
> equivalent to what you would get with a traditional LitProg tool after
> "weaving" the documentation.

I don't know if I still need to draw your attention to LEO
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/leo). The DTD of Leo output files is
naturally not 1:1 with xmLP, but things like lp:usage attributes can
be generated automatically.

Of course, everyone has their own idea of what LP has to look like,
but after using Leo for a couple of weeks my impression is that of a
very flexible tool that can be geared towards many structures, including
at least an important subset of the xmLP grammar.

Greetings


Johannes
>