Re: Doc update, 0x020 update summary

["Pete St. Onge" <pstong1@po-box.mcgill.ca>]

Bob,

> Just a quick post, before I get to expanding the software items. Auto
> correct is equivalent to your Quick Correct. Esther is using it
> exactly like your example for exactly the same reason, reducing the
> number of keystrokes. She has the same customers saying the same
> thing over and over. Each customer is set up with 200-300 mappings
> from several characters to strings of up to several sentences.The
> reason for needing multiple Quick Correct databases or whatever they
> are called (Word calls them dots)
     *.DOT (or DOcument Templates) are also perhaps the biggest software
security weakness going, as this is where the macro viruses hang out in
Word docs. Notice that this isn't a problem in WordPerfect... :)
     That said, I don't immediately see a way to set up something
similar in WP8. The templates do not contain code or anything executable
, and I don't see a way to have more than one source of Quick Correct
data. That said, a work around might be done using scripting to set up
and remove a specific set of short forms using the macro editor, setting
up the toolbars to simplify the task to the user (basically have the
toolbars call the right macros to unload the existing defs and then
load  in the new ones). 

> is twofold. The total number is very large and thus unwieldy. Also
> different customers may say the same thing using different words.
> With multiple dots the code can be the same with the output matched
> to the customer. This leaves me feeling that end users may have
> things set up in some specific way. For them to migrate to Linux,
> not only must Linux software exist but there must be some way to
> convert their existing files to Linux software equivalents. In our
> case, not only Word files but dot files as well.
     I completely agree. The migration process must be a painless one,
period. This is why I'm glad to see WP8 now available for linux (mind
you, I really doubt that I'll see Word for linux anytime soon, given
that Word is a Microsoft product). 

> In a multicomputer
> environment, I'm not too concerned about Linux equivalents for every
> program since one can always leave one computer running Windows
> until equivalent software is found. Not only that but originally we
> had written our own billing program. Another point the value of
> source code access. With access the problems I've mentioned could be
> easily fixed.
     If one can use a windows-based X emulator, a small networked office
can move people from WP for Windows to WP for linux fairly painlessly.
Over time, as people become more familiar with the interface, the OS
switch can then take place with the user familiarity already in place. 

-- 
Pete St. Onge - McGill U.  Limnology - Fun with Ropes & Buckets
pete@seul.org                  http://wwp.mirabilis.com/4322052