New PostScript manuals generated

New PostScript manuals generated

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

I changed the font size to 11pt -- 10pt seemed too small for Bembo and
12pt too big.  I use Futura 10pt (which is the same size as Bembo
11pt, for some reason) for variable names (etc.) and Adobe Courier
11pt for the code examples (etc.).  I was recommended IBM's Courier,
but we didn't have that one.

I've also added Luis' hand-drawn gnu herds for the chapter pages.  I
blurred them some, since they weren't scanned in that high a
resolution.  For the back cover I used something I generated
accidentally -- a washed-out section of the herd pictured with an
obscenely high smooth factor.  A nice accident, I think.

So the manual now kinda looks like I want it to look, I think.  Unless
I change my mind, of course.  It's 250 pages, 1Mb compressed (20Mb
uncompressed -- those gnu herd pictures compress very nicely).  Get it
from <URL:http://www.ifi.uio.no/~larsi/gnus.org.www/documents/>.
It'll spread over to <URL:http://gnus.org.www/documents/> later
tonight.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Jost.Krieger+list]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

I've printed (and kinda proofmarked) the A4 edition (again).
Here are my (global) findings:

> I changed the font size to 11pt -- 10pt seemed too small for Bembo and
> 12pt too big.  I use Futura 10pt (which is the same size as Bembo
> 11pt, for some reason) for variable names (etc.) and Adobe Courier
> 11pt for the code examples (etc.).  I was recommended IBM's Courier,
> but we didn't have that one.

The fonts look nice, except that in some places you use an italic font
that's way too large (like in the A4 version on page 205:
*backend*-status-string).

> I've also added Luis' hand-drawn gnu herds for the chapter pages.  I
> blurred them some, since they weren't scanned in that high a
> resolution.  For the back cover I used something I generated
> accidentally -- a washed-out section of the herd pictured with an
> obscenely high smooth factor.  A nice accident, I think.

The chapter gnus are nice, except the Appendices have chapter number
10 and nine gnus in front :-) Should that be an inverted Gnu ?

> So the manual now kinda looks like I want it to look, I think.  Unless
> I change my mind, of course.

My 2 Pfennige:

I think the page gnu should be farther away from the text body, like
under the page number.

The outer margin is quite large. Could we put something sensible in
there (like Notes and Warnings)? Oops. There *are* gnus there, just
not that many. Could those be centered in the margin, or at least be
symmetric for left and right pages ?

Your reference algorithm is broken. External references are horrible,
but rare.  Internal references point to the place before the chapter
or section, typically on the wrong page. If you use LaTeX's reference
mechanism, make sure the "label"s are generated after the chapter
heading. (Could we have a look at your production tools ?)

Contentswise:

I miss something about customize.

The FAQ is so old, it smells. Like

"The latest (and greatest) version is 5.0.10. ..."

There is a *much* newer version online that mentions Quassia instead
of insisting "September gnus is the alpha version ..."



Then there are the typos ... coming later, as always.

Jost

BTW: Thank you for the nice manual, I really like it, even if it doesn't sound so :-)

-- 
Jost Krieger, Postmaster, Rechenzentrum der Ruhr-Universitaet Bochum
Jost.Krieger@ruhr-uni-bochum.de

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Justin Sheehy]

Jost.Krieger+list@ruhr-uni-bochum.de writes:

> The FAQ is so old, it smells. Like
> 
> "The latest (and greatest) version is 5.0.10. ..."
> 
> There is a *much* newer version online that mentions Quassia instead
> of insisting "September gnus is the alpha version ..."

Yeah, I know.

I need to sit down with the texinfo reference and make a new
conversion.  The FAQ itself is maintained in HTML.  There is no simple
way that I know of to convert HTML to texinfo. [1]  Thus, I need to do
it by hand.  I'll get to this soon, really I will.

I may end up deciding at some point to maintain it in some other
format which is more trivially convertible to others, but I'm not
really sure yet if I want to do that.

-Justin

 
[1]  If anyone knows of one, feel free to tell me.  :-)

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Hrvoje Niksic]

Justin Sheehy <dworkin@ccs.neu.edu> writes:

> I need to sit down with the texinfo reference and make a new
> conversion.  The FAQ itself is maintained in HTML.  There is no simple
> way that I know of to convert HTML to texinfo. [1]
[...]
> [1]  If anyone knows of one, feel free to tell me.  :-)

I converted the whole of XEmacs FAQ in one day, and it was really
simple.  As I type quite fast, the whole work was done in only 11
hours of incessant typing.  But, as Gnus FAQ is so much smaller, you
should be through in less than 5 hours!

Can't get simpler than that, really. :-)

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
Unspeakable horrors from outer space paralyze the living and
resurrect the dead!

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> writes:

> Maintain the original in SGML and use the SGML tools to make various other
> version from the hypertext version.  I believe that they include an SGML to
> Texinfo filter.
> 
> Failing that, maintain the original in Texinfo and use the Texinfo to HTML
> filter.

Hear, hear.

The last couple of weeks I've had to search out documentation on
various fields I don't know much about, and it's rather heartbreaking
for me to see just how much stuff is only documented on the Web.  I
want to print things out, sit down in my sofa and read things off of
paper, not sit staring at the screen while reading documentation.
It's fine for reading quickie stuff, but for actual reading, it's
awful, I think.

I'm really happy with the FSF's choice of TeXinfo.  We get paper, info
and HTML documentation all in one.  

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Steven L Baur]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> I'm really happy with the FSF's choice of TeXinfo.  We get paper, info
> and HTML documentation all in one.  

Everything except something acceptable to the News.Answers gods ... :-(
-- 
steve@calag.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be billed at $250/message.

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Per Abrahamsen]

Steven L Baur <steve@xemacs.org> writes:

> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> 
> > I'm really happy with the FSF's choice of TeXinfo.  We get paper, info
> > and HTML documentation all in one.  
> 
> Everything except something acceptable to the News.Answers gods ... :-(

Uh, Texinfo gives you plain text (with makeinfo --no-headers).  Isn't
plain text acceptable on news.answers?

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Hrvoje Niksic]

Per Abrahamsen <abraham@dina.kvl.dk> writes:

> > Everything except something acceptable to the News.Answers gods ... :-(
> 
> Uh, Texinfo gives you plain text (with makeinfo --no-headers).
> Isn't plain text acceptable on news.answers?

Hmm, really!  I think I like the output of XEmacs FAQ now. :-)

<URL:http://jagor.srce.hr/~hniksic/xemacs-faq.txt>

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
* Q: What is an experienced Emacs user?
* A: A person who wishes that the terminal had pedals.

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Steven L Baur]

Per Abrahamsen <abraham@dina.kvl.dk> writes:

> Steven L Baur <steve@xemacs.org> writes:

>> Everything except something acceptable to the News.Answers gods ... :-(

> Uh, Texinfo gives you plain text (with makeinfo --no-headers).  Isn't
> plain text acceptable on news.answers?

Preferable is digest or mini-digest format, which IIRC was also one of
your initial suggestions to the Gnus FAQ.
-- 
steve@calag.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be billed at $250/message.

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Hrvoje Niksic]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> I'm really happy with the FSF's choice of TeXinfo.  We get paper,
> info and HTML documentation all in one.

With Yodl, you get Texinfo, nroff, SGML, HTML[1] and plain text, all
in one.

YODL == Yet One-other Documentation Language


[1]
Yes, I know about the redundancy here.

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
* Vi is the God of editors.
* Emacs is the editor of Gods.

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes:

> With Yodl, you get Texinfo, nroff, SGML, HTML[1] and plain text, all
> in one.

Where can I find info on Yodl?

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Richard Coleman]

> Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes:
> 
> > With Yodl, you get Texinfo, nroff, SGML, HTML[1] and plain text, all
> > in one.
> 
> Where can I find info on Yodl?

http://www.icce.rug.nl/docs/programs/yodl/yodl.html

Richard Coleman
coleman@math.gatech.edu

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Jason R Mastaler]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Where can I find info on Yodl?

http://www.icce.rug.nl/docs/programs/yodl/yodl.html

   Jason R. Mastaler                      jason@mastaler.com

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Steinar Bang]

>>>>> Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net>:

>>>>> "JS" == Justin Sheehy <dworkin@ccs.neu.edu> writes:

JS> The FAQ itself is maintained in HTML.  There is no simple way that I
JS> know of to convert HTML to texinfo. [1] Thus, I need to do it by hand.

> Maintain the original in SGML and use the SGML tools to make various
> other version from the hypertext version.  I believe that they
> include an SGML to Texinfo filter.

What would be a good DTD? Write a custom FAQ DTD...?

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Robert Bihlmeyer]

Hi,

>>>>> On 18 Jun 1997 09:41:11 +0200
>>>>> Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no> said:

Someone said:
 >> Maintain the original in SGML and use the SGML tools to make
 >> various other version from the hypertext version. I believe that
 >> they include an SGML to Texinfo filter.

 Steinar> What would be a good DTD? Write a custom FAQ DTD...?

SGML-tools _is_ a DTD. From the blurb:

> This system is tailored for writing technical software documentation,
> an example of which are the Linux HOWTO documents. However, there is
> nothing Linux-specific about this package; it can be used for many
> other types of documentation on many other systems. It should be
> useful for all kinds of printed and online documentation.

Check with <URL:http://web.inter.NL.net/users/C.deGroot/sgmltools/>.

	Robbe

-- 
Robert Bihlmeyer	reads: Deutsch, English, MIME, Latin-1, NO SPAM!
<robbe@orcus.priv.at>	<http://stud2.tuwien.ac.at/~e9426626/sig.html>

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Steinar Bang]

>>>>> Robert Bihlmeyer <e9426626@student.tuwien.ac.at>:

> Hi,
>>>>> On 18 Jun 1997 09:41:11 +0200
>>>>> Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no> said:

> Someone said:
>>> Maintain the original in SGML and use the SGML tools to make
>>> various other version from the hypertext version. I believe that
>>> they include an SGML to Texinfo filter.

Steinar> What would be a good DTD? Write a custom FAQ DTD...?

> SGML-tools _is_ a DTD. From the blurb:

Ah I read this, as "SGML Tools".  Ie. as the generic term, comprising
nsgmls, psgml, and what have you...
	<URL:http://www.falch.no/people/pepper/sgmltool/guide.htm>

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Jost.Krieger+list@ruhr-uni-bochum.de writes:

> The fonts look nice, except that in some places you use an italic font
> that's way too large (like in the A4 version on page 205:
> *backend*-status-string).

Yeah, that looked ugly.  It's not an italic font -- it's a slanted
sans serif thing.  I've no idea why it ended up bigger than the
surrounding text.  I've now made it smaller explicitly.

> The chapter gnus are nice, except the Appendices have chapter number
> 10 and nine gnus in front :-) Should that be an inverted Gnu ?

I'm going to drop two of the chapters ("Composing Messages" and "The
Article Buffer" -- they'll be moved to "Various".  They're rather
small.) and add a new "Introduction to Gnus" chapter that'll explain
the main points without using any big words, and lots of screenshots.
And Custom screenshots.

That should give us 9 chapters, if one can count "Appendices" as a
chapter.  

> I think the page gnu should be farther away from the text body, like
> under the page number.

Ah, yes, that might be nice.  I'll give it a try and see how it
looks. 

> The outer margin is quite large. Could we put something sensible in
> there (like Notes and Warnings)? Oops. There *are* gnus there, just
> not that many. Could those be centered in the margin, or at least be
> symmetric for left and right pages ?

Yup.

There'll also be toolbar icons (if somebody would make those large
versions, that is.  Pleeeeeze!) and X-Faces and smilies and picons and
stuff in the margins.  Where they belong, of course.

The screenshots will also occupty the margins as well as the body.
That is, they'll be as wide as that line on the top of the page.

> Your reference algorithm is broken. External references are horrible,
> but rare.  Internal references point to the place before the chapter
> or section, typically on the wrong page. If you use LaTeX's reference
> mechanism, make sure the "label"s are generated after the chapter
> heading.

I run LaTeX on the output thrice, but I guess that isn't enough.  :-)

First I run LaTeX to get the indices and stuff, and then it's run to
include the table of contents, and then one would think the third run
should get the page references right, but perhaps the length of the
page references skew things, so that I'll have to run it again to get
the page references right.

> (Could we have a look at your production tools ?)

<URL:http://www.ifi.uio.no/~larsi/rgnus/texi/> is where it all
happens. 

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Jost Krieger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 458 bytes --]

>>>>> "Lars" == Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

 Lars> I run LaTeX on the output thrice, but I guess that isn't enough.  :-)

That's not the problem. Look at your generated code:

\label{Finding the News}
\gnussection{Finding the News}
\gnusindex{finding news}

This won't work until you put the "\label" after the "\gnussection".

Hmm, which means minor surgery, as \label is generated from "@node" and
\gnussection from "@section".

Jost

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 106 bytes --]

--
Jost Krieger, Postmaster, Rechenzentrum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum
Jost.Krieger@ruhr-uni-bochum.de

Re: New PostScript manuals generated

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Jost Krieger <Jost.Krieger@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:

> \label{Finding the News}
> \gnussection{Finding the News}
> \gnusindex{finding news}
> 
> This won't work until you put the "\label" after the "\gnussection".

Ah, right.  I'll just flip the lines.  Or better yet, have
\gnussection call \label after doing the sectioning.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen