I was merely commenting on the usability of "style sheets" in Word, not arguing that one thing should replace another. For instance, I can easily imagine that the run-of-the-mill "markup" WYSIWYG workflow in Word is an excellent fit for writing a short formal letter.
Although, a few years ago, a couple of friends of mine were working on their masters theses in non-computer related fields (literature and biology), they complained about Word and its tendency to get somewhat "wonky" when working with very large documents (I am glad I have never had to experience such a task). I talked to them about the basic ideas behind the LaTeX workflow, that writing the text and doing layout/styling are straight from the start intended to be two separate concepts--you're either working on one or the other. And how the text content is also just that: a plain text file with a few document structure-related codes in it. A plain text file doesn't lose whole sections or mangles up chapters for no apparent reason.
I was surprised to hear their reaction, they were very intrigued and would have been readily prepared to learn the basics of LaTeX, if it meant getting that peace-of-mind: that writing a large chunk of text means that it is there, without a program doing behind-the-scenes modifications on it if you decide to move parts around, or so. I say "would have been" because they were already quite far in their theses so it would've made little sense to make the switch still.
Because that's really the point, isn't it? That's what annoys me about Word (and a lot of other word processing software btw), it just won't keep its fingers off my document, and all sorts of things happen under-the-hood. With LaTeX (and similar solutions, perhaps Markdown) the whole workflow is different: first you write the content, with some minimal markup and structuring codes, and that's a text file. It's yours and nobody, no software is going to touch it. It's source code. And only then you apply a program to it, in order to compile it to a display format. But that program will not touch your source.
I really like it that way. I understand it's not for everyone on the consumer market, but it's interesting to consider how different that paradigm is.
Although, a few years ago, a couple of friends of mine were working on their masters theses in non-computer related fields (literature and biology), they complained about Word and its tendency to get somewhat "wonky" when working with very large documents (I am glad I have never had to experience such a task). I talked to them about the basic ideas behind the LaTeX workflow, that writing the text and doing layout/styling are straight from the start intended to be two separate concepts--you're either working on one or the other. And how the text content is also just that: a plain text file with a few document structure-related codes in it. A plain text file doesn't lose whole sections or mangles up chapters for no apparent reason.
I was surprised to hear their reaction, they were very intrigued and would have been readily prepared to learn the basics of LaTeX, if it meant getting that peace-of-mind: that writing a large chunk of text means that it is there, without a program doing behind-the-scenes modifications on it if you decide to move parts around, or so. I say "would have been" because they were already quite far in their theses so it would've made little sense to make the switch still.
Because that's really the point, isn't it? That's what annoys me about Word (and a lot of other word processing software btw), it just won't keep its fingers off my document, and all sorts of things happen under-the-hood. With LaTeX (and similar solutions, perhaps Markdown) the whole workflow is different: first you write the content, with some minimal markup and structuring codes, and that's a text file. It's yours and nobody, no software is going to touch it. It's source code. And only then you apply a program to it, in order to compile it to a display format. But that program will not touch your source.
I really like it that way. I understand it's not for everyone on the consumer market, but it's interesting to consider how different that paradigm is.