[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs vs Scrivener
From: |
Bastien |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs vs Scrivener |
Date: |
Sat, 24 Nov 2012 18:46:33 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Matt,
Matt Price <moptop99@gmail.com> writes:
> - IIUC, one organizing principle of Scriviener is a spatial metaphor:
> "Scrivener is intended to be a kind of “writer’s shed” for those of us
> who don’t have a spare shed." So drafts are organized as projects
> which are kept in virtual "binders". I think this metaphorical
> framework is important to its appeal -- it turns your laptop into a
> giant desk on which ou can arrange and rearrange elements of a complex
> text. The whole interfae is influenced by this metaphor...
One feature that can be implemented for Emacs is this one: bind several
windows together and have some commands act on them all.
For example, if you have a two-windows frame, you can bind these two
windows and run C-s in both of them simultaneously. Another example:
you could open two dired buffers then run M-% (and `D') in both of them
simultaneously.
This is closer to the concept of a workspace than of virtual binders,
and it's not straightforward to implement this, but it would be useful.
> - In concert with this, each document -- each piece of a project --
> has both a title and a synopsis, which are represented by an "index
> card" You cna move index cards around within the project. I like
> this because sometimes, with a ocmplex piece of writing, it can be
> helpful to look at al the elements and rearrange them in space. A
> whiteboard is good for this, or scraps of paper on a blank table.
> Org-mode lets you refile headings easily, but the one-dimensional
> ordering isn't as satisfying to me as objects that can be dragged form
> one place to another.
The refile mechanism could be enhance by allowing fuzzy matching of
headlines, and creating those that do not exist in the .org file.
On my todo-list for when I have some time (which is obviously not
anytime soon...)
> What do you think, Bastien? Is a lot of this already in org-mode? &
> what kinds of tweaks would be necessary to make the emacs interface
> more tactile-feeling, or anyway spatially intuitive?
I don't know about the spatial metaphor, I'm not familiar enough with
scrivener. But there is surely room for small improvements tha makes
the Emacs experience even better.
Best,
--
Bastien
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, (continued)
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Dmitry Gutov, 2012/11/20
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Susan Cragin, 2012/11/19
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Xavier Maillard, 2012/11/20
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, drain, 2012/11/20
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Bastien, 2012/11/21
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Matt Price, 2012/11/21
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Matt Price, 2012/11/22
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Burton Samograd, 2012/11/22
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Matt Price, 2012/11/26
- Message not available
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, William Gardella, 2012/11/27
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener,
Bastien <=
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Eric Abrahamsen, 2012/11/24
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Matt Price, 2012/11/26
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Oleksandr Gavenko, 2012/11/25
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Bastien, 2012/11/26
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Matt Price, 2012/11/26
- Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Bastien, 2012/11/26
Re: Emacs vs Scrivener, Stefan Monnier, 2012/11/19