In the rest of this section we
will concentrate on what is needed after such a generic ???version 1.0.??? Since each tool
has its own focus, even version 1.0 will contain some of these features, and possibly
even several from a given category. There is no stigma to be associated with the term
???version 1.0???: every tool will have its ?¬?rst version. Similarly, there is not necessarily a
bene?¬?t to being at ???version 7.5???: in many ways, the thought and understanding already
discernable from the ?¬?rst couple of versions are a better indicator of success than a
high version number.
Clearly, the authors are associated with one particular tool, which happens to be
one that has been developed for longer than many others??”nearly 20 years at the time
of writing. Unsurprisingly, given that time frame, many of the things we identify as
useful have already been implemented in the tool. Indeed, the majority of these can
already be found from the original articles on MetaEdit and MetaEdit+ (Smolander
et al., 1991; Kelly et al., 1996): this is thus not a cheap attempt to list all the features of
the current MetaEdit+ 4.5. Conversely, some things we originally thought useful and
implemented have turned out not to be so valuable, adding little or even being
detrimental. Although those features may be found in earlier publications, and some
borderline cases may even still be present in the tools for the sake of existing
customers, they are thus omitted from this list.
Pages:
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699