Re: automator
Re: automator
- Subject: Re: automator
- From: "John C. Welch" <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:15:35 -0600
- Thread-topic: automator
<evidently, this was not an offlist email>
On 11/28/2007 11:39 AM, "Timothy Klein" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2007, at 9:00 AM, John C. Welch wrote:
>
>> On 11/27/2007 21:32 PM, "Timothy Klein" <email@hidden> wrote:
>>> Excel will likely never have Automator support. Pages and Numbers
>>> *ought* to have Automator support, but they currently don't (Keynote
>>> does).
>>
>> In addition to what PaulB said, what you are saying is well, wrong.
>
> Well, um, no, it's not: that's why I mentioned shell scripts and
> Applescripts, But to be honest, if you can do it with a shell script
> or Applescript, the advantages of wrapping it in Automator are small
> (it provides a better UI , and the plug-ability *may* be nice for
> you, but other than that, msot of your real work is done outside
> Automator).
You do understand that you actually *write* Automator actions WITH
AppleScript, Shell, and Cocoa? Because it's not "wrapping" anything. Those
are the languages and environments you create Automator actions with. You
may choose to disbelieve this, but it is in fact, the truth. There's no
"real" or "not real" just because you don't use Cocoa or <language you think
'real' programs are written in>.
>
> But seeing how this is a *users* list, I spent no time in my brief
> post about that path, as it seems a distinctly developer-oriented
> route, to me (yeah, Applescript is a "user" technology, but I have no
> idea if the OP knows any Applescript). I like Automator, but I've
> tried to shoe-horn it into jobs where it doesn't currently shine, and
> it's just been more work than it was worth. Using it with non-
> Automator aware apps is such a job.
If the application has an AppleScript dictionary, it is automator aware.
Period. If the application has a shell interface, or exposes its internal
Cocoa frameworks, it is Automator aware. Period.
What exactly did you think Automator actions are created in?
>
> I apologize for the error about Excel and Automator -- I don't pay
> close attention to MS roadmaps, and Automator didn't seem like a very
> Microsoft-y thing. Having coded Automator, though, I can see how it
> would be easy for MS to add Actions if they already have Applescript
> support.
Since Applescript is one of the prime Automator languages, yes, that makes
sense
> Especially in light of that recent hubub about MS Office
> losing VisualBasic support on the next iteration for the Mac -- MS
> will want to try and leverage Mac automation tools as much as
> possible, to ease the sting of that.
And every single Automator action that Microsoft ships with Office will be
written in AppleScript.
--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Automator-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden