[scribus] Easiest way to insert text.

[Gregory Pittman]

On 06/03/2011 02:06 PM, John Ghormley KJ4UFG wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Gregory Pittman<gregp_ky at yahoo.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/2011 10:29 AM, Stéphanie Vilayphiou wrote:
>>
>>> I also think Story Editor is a key function.
>>> It is not only about copying/pasting text, but it is about editing
>>> afterwards. It is very convenient to edit. You don't have to zoom in/out
>>> to edit very small captions for example. Or in my latest work, I had
>>> text upside/down, so Story Editor is perfect for that. Although it
>>> misses a lot of features present in the Properties palette, so a lot of
>>> stuff is impossible to do directly in there, i.e. applying a character
>>> style (absolutely necessary!).
>>> please don't kill it!
>>>
>>
>> I don't know that there is an effort to simply kill the SE.
>> It's more of a recognition of SE's limitations that is the source of
>> trouble.
>>
>> I do agree that some sort in bulk simple editing is needed. Perhaps one
>> answer might come from a free-standing plain text editor that can import
>> from/save to the document, called up like Gimp is called up, with some sort
>> of tags to denote things like paragraph and character styles.
>>
>> At the moment what we have is a mix of those who don't use and recommend to
>> others not to use SE, and those who still use it in spite of its
>> shortcomings.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
> I think it's been asked here before, but what is the problem with the Style
> Editor co-existing with the in frame editing capability?  I can see
> advantages to both methods of composing and editing depending on what task I
> am doing at the moment.  I recognize that my rather repetitious paragraph
> style formatted magazine may not be representative of the work many other
> Scribus users do, but the Scribus does tend to try to accommodate all types
> of DTP, it seems.  Therefore, with a few updates, the Story Editor would
> seem to fill its role quite nicely.  I fail to see the major problems that
> necessitate an external editor and fear the issues that potential editor
> might bring about.

Don't take what I said too seriously. It's mostly that some feel the SE 
is quite useless for their needs (I still find it useful). So there is 
this push to "rewrite" the SE -- but to what?

Greg