Forum Posts Feed
ConnectedText; any case studies?
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Pages: ‹ First < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > Last ›
Posted by JBfrom
Mar 5, 2012 at 10:10 PM
Keeping in mind that I just briefly trialed CT on Wine and got turned off by the semi-incompatibility with Linux and massive nag text, so I don’t know much of the markup…
Compare the markup for CT with Org-Mode and Wordpress
I can get collapsible hierarchical headings in Org with Emacs editing keybinds
Then in Wordpress I’ve got WYSIWYG links, basic formatting, quotes, links, etc.
That’s pretty much enough.
I don’t even use Org markup beyond headings because it ruins fast visual scanning. And going to markup for pretty versions of fast drafts I currently do in Wordpress seems a big step down.
Posted by Alexander Deliyannis
Mar 5, 2012 at 10:35 PM
JBfrom wrote:
>And going to markup for pretty versions of fast drafts I
>currently do in Wordpress seems a big step down.
From my limited experience with ConnectedText, I will agree with Chris that you can mostly ignore it. And with smart shortcuts like Ctrl+Alt+N (describe earlier in this thread) you should be able to do much of the more advanced stuff with little consideration.
That said, I’ve been trying out Markdown recently and I believe that its emphasis on readability is brilliant. I wish that it could be a standard option for wikis, even if some advanced (e.g. semantic) features of tools like ConnectedText would not be supported through it.
Posted by JBfrom
Mar 5, 2012 at 11:00 PM
Ignoring markup would make it significantly more awesome.
I’m trialing it now to see what kind of shortcuts are provided.
First impression - it has a WYSIWYG editor bar. lol. So I was talking nonsense.
That should be a bigger selling point. Lots of wikis don’t have that, and it is… pardon the incoming caps… i feel very strongly…
UNBELIEVABLY #$)@$@ ANNOYING
/end rant
Posted by Dr Andus
Mar 6, 2012 at 03:44 PM
Eduardo Mauro wrote:
>Dr Andus wrote:
>>I have only just begun exploring CT, so I apologise if this question
>is too basic. But if
>>you use CT as a writing tool (e.g. to write a book), and then you
>export it as a bunch of
>>.txt files, does it mean you have to then manually go and remove
>every single mark-up
>>from the text? That would seem to me like an awful big hassle…
>Is there any way of
>>avoiding that?
>
>Some users export the content of a project to
>HTML files and then import them in Word (or any other writing tool which accepts HTML).
>You can even export to a single HTML file. Nonetheless, some editing will be required
>but no markup commands will be present.
Actually this issue turned out to be a lesser problem than I expected. Copy and paste from CT’s view window (as opposed to the edit window) straight into Word works reasonably well. Although the formatting, headings and bullet points are lost, I can live with that. Though I imagine if one had hundreds of topics, then a straightforward export into RTF (a la Scrivener) would be much preferable.
Posted by Dr Andus
Mar 18, 2012 at 11:16 PM
Here is a great CT case study from Manfred, complete with screenshots:
http://connectedtext.com/forum/index.php?topic=2389.msg10041#msg10041