> we can get great benefits from a system that expands abbreviations, ... emmet-style powers
I can't agree here (excepting perhaps the unicode char replacement which a non-english speaker needs to comment on the viability of, vs actually having a non-english keyboard (excepting huge alphabets like chinese where that is used already AFAIK)).
Writing is fundamentally a thinking process, the text entry for a touch typist is relatively quick. If you are to propose expanding abbreviations, how much time do you expect to save? I mean, actually measured it?
> runs little scripts and inserts the output
What is the purpose of this?
> gives you quick dictionary/thesaurus lookups
I use those perhaps once a week or less. If you use it say 3X a day, you'd save little time, perhaps a couple of minutes.
Dunno what emmet powers are though.
MS word & libreOffice does some of what you want and the first time I install them, I spend several minutes tracking down each setting and turning them off - they drive me bonkers. They think they know what I want but they don't. Touch typists can hit many keys a second and kind of pipeline their typing. Having the input modified automatically is rarely useful IMO.
Your idea may be good but like many other ideas such as graphical programming, except in restricted cases they don't work. Perhaps if you measured it I'd be convinced but I can't accept it now as an obviously great benefit.