Posted by Philip Marx on January 7, 2000, at 2:59:25
In reply to Re: formatting, posted by Dr. Bob on January 7, 2000, at 0:48:18
Thanks, I kept losing formatting too late to fix it after the submit button re-parsed it. My stuff is big enough to need micro-formatting, and it looks terrible without it. Nothing is better than WP5.1, and Word won't let you change much mid-paragraph, too much of a core-engine copy of Ventura Publisher. I stopped trying to fix it the Tech way far too late for some of the impatient here. I admire what is going on here. I think I can make some positive pictorials during class breaks. I'll let you decide when/if they are public ready Dr. Bob.
Word tech support has always told me they were working on "this deficiency" compared to WordPerfect 5.1 DOS re: adding tags and references with autotracking, maybe '2000 has it or will. Until then, I'd rather go back to DOS than build a paper that doesn't keep track of itself. It's terrible. Yes, that less than sign gobbled up a lot of my stuff, it loses asterisks that precede a character without an intermediate space. The system also loses all indent spaces and leading spaces and tabs, I don't know if it's at the Windows clipboard paste/dump or not. It made my writing look far worse than my attitude is towards driving myself to a perfected death again. I'm doing this in the web text box without proofing in Word this time, so let's see.
1test
12test
123 test
Those test lines have as many spaces preceding them as there are numbers.--The chronological separation I was talking about wasn't the one within each thread, those are fine, and I wouldn't have embarrassed myself so much if I had constrained myself to them with what I now see as proper protocol
But, the chrono-confusion potential is demonstrable since only the first entry in a thread maintains it's seniority, it's second entry can be posted far after an earlier (higher-up) sub-thread get it's first response. For example:
From the beginning of this month:
Re: Reboxetine (Edronax) Bruce 1/3/00
Reboxetine side effects Frymet 1/3/00
Re: Reboxetine side effects Peter 1/4/00
Re: Reboxetine side effects torchgrl 1/5/00
Re: Question -- Re: Nicotine gum Richard 1/2/00
Re: Losing weight after paxil Shannon 1/4/00
Re: Losing weight after paxil Mark Weeks 1/5/00
Re: Losing weight after paxil mrkwks@aol.com 1/5/00Note that some 1/5/00 are before 1/2/00.
So, an answer posted on 1/5/00 wouldn't have a question to go with it show until someone read down that far. I've never been on a multi-thread board before. I should have known sooner.
I was mostly responsive to the yellow "spot"lights, I really like that feature. So, I think there were a couple of cases "higher up" that I used to combine with answers from lower down. Really un-un-un-insightful of me. Someone, reading from the top, didn't have a chance of knowing which question I was answering, since I didn't stay within originating threads. If I had started at the real beginning, I might have appreciated what this grows into. The points I "wasn't" sticking to might be in last months babble-cache on a thread the readers might never read.
> > Looks lke an old mainframe editor problem eating up all my formatting characters. I'll track through the FAQs later. Manual space paragraphs for now.
>
> Sorry, but there's no way to format very much here, at least right now. "Manual space" paragraphs is about it. And the less-than sign is a special case (see the FAQ).
>
> > -Reading back, I see one of the problems. The threads aren’t in chronological order, except within sub-threads.
>
> The threads are in fact in chronological order -- based on when they were started.
>
> > -I could break all this up into indentured sub-paragraphs, but the site “left-justifies” everything. A bunch of smaller paragraphs just looks like so many endlessly rippling sand dunes. Maybe if I next time double return between major thought blocks, hmmm, I can avoid paragraph numbering maintenance obnoxious-ness. Dr. Bob?
>
> Multi-level outline-type (sub-)paragraph headachiness?
>
> BobTags and references in WP5.1 still rule as far as I am concerned, I've never had a proofreader find a figure number misquoted unless the figure count exceeded 32 in a subsection. I loved (and still do) how I could insert sectiona and subsections at will or whim and every reference to any paragraph number would update to point to the right place. I couldn't have done half as much without it with the time I had back then, but now, I'll just have to budget more time.
I again apologise for poor nettiquette. I don't like the taste of literal crow.
Thanks - Dr. Bob
poster:Philip Marx
thread:17556
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000101/msgs/18268.html