From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 19 22:09:39 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB7981065677 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:09:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lab@gta.com) Received: from mailgate.gta.com (mailgate.gta.com [199.120.225.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F49D8FC08 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:09:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lab@gta.com) Received: (qmail 44531 invoked by uid 1000); 19 Jan 2009 21:42:57 -0000 Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:42:57 -0500 From: Larry Baird To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20090119214257.GA43926@gta.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: FreeBSD 7 stable, firefox 3 and www.yahoo.com X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:09:40 -0000 Since I upgraded to the latest firefox (firefox-3.0.5_1,1) I get the following at www.yahoo.com: Why miss out? To see all the new Yahoo! home page has to offer, please upgrade to a more recent browser. Supported browsers include: Internet Explorer 7 optimized by Yahoo! Firefox 3 Safari 3 Opera 9 Flock Is anybody else seeing this? Larry -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Larry Baird | http://www.gta.com Global Technology Associates, Inc. | Orlando, FL Email: lab@gta.com | TEL 407-380-0220, FAX 407-380-6080 From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 23 17:13:52 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E08F31065674 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:13:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Received: from ezekiel.daleco.biz (southernuniform.com [66.76.92.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 663268FC18 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:13:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ezekiel.daleco.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n0NGwq8K031389; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:58:53 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at daleco.biz Received: from ezekiel.daleco.biz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ezekiel.daleco.biz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 8RjNeT2bxD2W; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:58:50 -0600 (CST) Received: from archangel.daleco.biz (ezekiel.daleco.biz [66.76.92.18]) by ezekiel.daleco.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n0NGvkIO031367; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:57:56 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Message-ID: <4979F70A.2000900@daleco.biz> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:57:46 -0600 From: Kevin Kinsey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080719 SeaMonkey/1.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jason C. Wells" References: <4966EB68.4030200@highperformance.net> In-Reply-To: <4966EB68.4030200@highperformance.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: fbsd_chat Subject: Re: Top Talent for Free X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:13:53 -0000 Jason C. Wells wrote: > Something occured to me recently when I was listening the the Mormon > Tabernacle Choir sing Handel's Messiah the other day. There is no > shortage of top talent willing to perform some tasks for free. In this > particular case, one could argue that some of the very best in the world > are singing for free. Many musicians work for free in well established > orchestras, for example in Seattle where I paid money to hear Messiah. > > It seems like the same is true for open source. There are some very > clever people right here in the FreeBSD community. Some are more widely > known (jkh, Watson, McKusick) than others but all of them are very > good. Some open source developers have turned their open source > involvement into a lucrative gig. But many remain volunteers. > > Then you have situations like football here in the US or even football > as you call it everywhere else. There is no shortage of top talent in > these sports. These people command sizable incomes in this effort though. > > So what's the difference? How do some fields of endeavor get top talent > for free and other fields of endeavor pay big bucks for the top talent? > Certainly we could find footballers to play on TV for free. 1] Love of the field of endeavor. 2] Idealism. 3] Knowing it's a pipe dream to get paid for it anyway. My $0.02, -- Any man who hates dogs and babies can't be all bad. -- Leo Rosten, on W.C. Fields From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 23 17:13:58 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B12910656BA for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:13:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Received: from ezekiel.daleco.biz (southernuniform.com [66.76.92.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D16D48FC1E for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:13:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ezekiel.daleco.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n0NGrUTd031289 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:53:35 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at daleco.biz Received: from ezekiel.daleco.biz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ezekiel.daleco.biz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id iViEiFtVkzGa for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:53:23 -0600 (CST) Received: from archangel.daleco.biz (ezekiel.daleco.biz [66.76.92.18]) by ezekiel.daleco.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n0NGrHYE031281 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:53:18 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Message-ID: <4979F5FD.4020002@daleco.biz> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:53:17 -0600 From: Kevin Kinsey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080719 SeaMonkey/1.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD Chat Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Think before you type, Volume 42b... X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:13:58 -0000 [28] Fri 23.Jan.2009 10:45:25 [admin@archangel][~] ssh mailhost sudo ls -l /var/amavis/tmp | wc -l ^CKilled by signal 2. [29] Fri 23.Jan.2009 10:47:09 [admin@archangel][~] ssh mailhost "sudo ls -l /var/amavis/tmp | wc -l" 25381 [30] Fri 23.Jan.2009 10:47:13 [admin@archangel][~] Doh! So very glad I don't pay by the kB. Kevin Kinsey -- Have you flogged your kid today? From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 24 20:40:23 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0A251065670 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:40:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@telenix.org) Received: from mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A404C8FC1E for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:40:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@telenix.org) Received: (qmail 17140 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2009 20:26:34 -0000 Received: from april.chuckr.org (HELO april.telenix.org) (chuckr@[66.92.151.30]) (envelope-sender ) by mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 24 Jan 2009 20:26:32 -0000 Message-ID: <497B77C7.90001@telenix.org> Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 15:19:19 -0500 From: Chuck Robey User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071107) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 OpenPGP: id=F3DCA0E9; url=http://pgp.mit.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: text formatting tools. X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:40:24 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Just felt like venting my own opinions on what's the current best toolset for writing documents. I think that this opinion isn't a popular one, but that's what this list is for. I'll give you all of my reasons, so at least you'll know what to argue about, if you feel strongly about this. Well, I think no one could argue that the most popular toolset is that based upon xml and probably xsl. When it first came out, I reacted very coolly towards it, because while that xml/xsl approach could do everything my own choice could do, the only available tools with either very expensive, or very gigantic. What's my choice? I like to use groff for text formatting and page layout, xfig for technical drawings, and something like inkscape for the more artistic approach. Let me get back to the comparisons. I didn't want to get all that oud about xml/xsl, because I felt that given time, hopefully, better tools would appear. While the ability to spend money on that has hugely expanded, and the number of incompatible macro sets have also hugely appreared, the minimum size of any free software toolsets remains gigantic. If I'm wrong here, PLEASE, tell me, I would be only too happy to be proved wrong, but I can't find any yet. And don't think that if you give me one particular tool that gets one particular part of the entire job and say that single part is small, I will ignore you. It's either all of the tools, or it's not, trying to sneak in one small part is not an honest tactic to take. Most of the ways I've ever seen require an entire TeX suite, which is probably larger in itself than all the rest of FreeBSD all put together. Take as comparison the size of groff, which is really relatively tiny, but it takes the exact same part of the job on (not based upon TeX, it's based upon the troff command set. Documentation? Well, I could point to the book named "Unix Text Processing", by Dougherty/O'Reilly. It's out of print, which is actually really pretty nice, because the publisher decided that instead of reprinting it, they just release a PDF of it for free. That's hugely good luck, because the book is totally fantastic, not only covering all of the various pieces of groff, but also going deep enough into the internal language so that you have no problem writing your own macros. Groff then leaves a key item, whether to base the formatting on solely hierarchical features, or allowing one to do it all like a typist might be expected to do, up to the writer, even allowing a pretty good amount of flexibility to mix the 2 approaches. Seeing as I personally don't really like being handcuffed into a hierarchical document approach, I really like the freedom. OK, I've described 2 of my reasons for liking it, that it's relatively tiny, and that it's far more flexibile in allowing an author to take their own approach. The fact that xml forces one to regard a document more like it is a database is probably a good thing for things like Web pages which are actually electronic salespeople, but it's a LOUSY method to force upon authors. Most books just aren't approached with preplanning and hierarchical control which is an endemic requirement for a sales database tool. So if you're not writing something like "newegg.com", well, maybe you do like it, but I never, ever, heard of anyone using any approach like this in any major piece of fiction, at least before some businesses (in another case of follow the leaderism) required it. Just like many commercial companies require you use MicroSoft Word, nothing but marketing propaganda. Heard of this before? I know we use this tool in our very good tool, the handbook. So, what we've done is deny to a large number of folks the ability to format the handbooks unelss they're willing to install a set of enormous tools. Used to be the Handbook formatted directly out of the OS with no added tools needed. Think that's difficult for a non-fiction tool? Ask Richard Stevens ghost, because his books could have been formatted using only the base FreeBSD IS also. OK, I don't know of any negative to using groff, except that you don't get to point at your toolset and claim it's the latest. All that internationalization, it would not be terrifically difficult to write macros sets for groff that would give the exact same effects, all done within the limits of FreeBSD's own tools. Groff even produces html, and it does a really bang-up job of formatting ASCII text pages, something which xml tools have never been able to do. I just don't get the reason to go with xml, except a bad case of follow the leader. What's the benefit that the users, or even the authors, accrue? And don't fail to realize that our groff cames with a set of ancillary tools like "pic", to be a very good job of doing technical drawings. That's what Richard Stevens did, so don't argue that it's either impossible, or even difficult to do well. If you argue this, please drop all the marketing propaganda, drop all references to what it does for Web pages, lets talk about writing things intended for paper. All those companies who base all their future on selling xml tools, they can't be considered non-interested observers, this is where their bread and butter comes from. Argue about real things that are different in an xml versus groff approach, from the point of view of non-database and non-sales oriented things. God, the amount of marketing crap that has gone out to push dynamic features (which web pages really do need) upon paper authors is impressive, but I never saw any use of this in any piece of fiction, or even in any technical dissertation, anything not destined for presentation via paper. Many companies depend on this for their future, so I'm skeptical. Show me a book which needs these features, a book that would be better written via an expensive hierarchical tool. Pencils might be low-tech, but they also allow folks without major finance to write, NOT using xml. This is going to get howls, but I really disliked our moving from a cheap, commonly available toolset to a complicated monstrosity (which our handbook did) was a mistake in strategy, trying to go the popular way. Making it so the number of folks who can format the sources is limited to folks which have the resources. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkl7d8cACgkQz62J6PPcoOkDoACdHf2kmkqHU+FgXJHtCQDfAMbz +O8An2PtC8sKSQ1pHXNYK2j6P7oayjuG =RQLB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 24 21:53:40 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 021C5106566C for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:53:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from murray@stokely.org) Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com (ey-out-2122.google.com [74.125.78.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 622198FC16 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:53:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from murray@stokely.org) Received: by ey-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id d26so675244eyd.7 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 13:53:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.210.17.14 with SMTP id 14mr3221055ebq.91.1232834018160; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 13:53:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <497B77C7.90001@telenix.org> References: <497B77C7.90001@telenix.org> Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 13:53:38 -0800 Message-ID: <2a7894eb0901241353l56be13b4s9860b9e949bc9ec2@mail.gmail.com> From: Murray Stokely To: Chuck Robey Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: text formatting tools. X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:53:40 -0000 On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Chuck Robey wrote: > I didn't want to get all that oud about xml/xsl, because I felt that given time, > hopefully, better tools would appear. While the ability to spend money on that > has hugely expanded, and the number of incompatible macro sets have also hugely > appreared, the minimum size of any free software toolsets remains gigantic. If > I'm wrong here, PLEASE, tell me, I would be only too happy to be proved wrong, I think your criticism of the distribution size of the tools is accurate but you are focusing on a dimension that the rest of the world has chosen to ignore in the era of 1TB disk drives. You are correct that any XML/XSLT based solution uses far more disk space than any groff based solution. I do not think many people care about this. Separation of content and presentation is worth far more to me then a few bits on a disk, to say nothing of the greater portability and programmability of XML. > Documentation? Well, I could point to the book named "Unix Text Processing", by > Dougherty/O'Reilly. It's out of print, which is actually really pretty nice, Would be a minority of O'Reilly books if that one was typeset with groff rather than DocBook XML. > OK, I've described 2 of my reasons for liking it, that it's relatively tiny, and > that it's far more flexibile in allowing an author to take their own approach. First reason is granted, but I think the second reason depends on a very particular definition of "flexible" and that many reasonable people would disagree with this and argue XML is the more flexible solution. > The fact that xml forces one to regard a document more like it is a database is > probably a good thing for things like Web pages which are actually electronic > salespeople, but it's a LOUSY method to force upon authors. Most books just > aren't approached with preplanning and hierarchical control which is an endemic > requirement for a sales database tool. So if you're not writing something like Technical manuals are generally highly hierarchical, as are most books actually with parts, chapters, sections, and paragraphs. Even those items need not be imposed on anyone with an XML/XSL tool. > "newegg.com", well, maybe you do like it, but I never, ever, heard of anyone > using any approach like this in any major piece of fiction, at least before some > businesses (in another case of follow the leaderism) required it. Just like > many commercial companies require you use MicroSoft Word, nothing but marketing > propaganda. Heard of this before? I think the MS connection is a pretty big leap as is a reduction without argument of XML's benefits to newegg.com. > I know we use this tool in our very good tool, the handbook. So, what we've > done is deny to a large number of folks the ability to format the handbooks > unelss they're willing to install a set of enormous tools. Used to be the > Handbook formatted directly out of the OS with no added tools needed. Think > that's difficult for a non-fiction tool? Ask Richard Stevens ghost, because his > books could have been formatted using only the base FreeBSD IS also. Sure, your problem could be solved by importing more XML tools into the base system, but I think that is the opposite direction we are going in. A number of base system tools are in FreeBSD because they were historically part of BSD but would today be kept as ports/packages if they weren't already there. LiveCD distributions such as PC-BSD could have a much larger base system pre-installed if this is something you seem to care a lot about in an operating system distribution. > OK, I don't know of any negative to using groff, except that you don't get to > point at your toolset and claim it's the latest. All that internationalization, I can think of dozens of reasons why we're not using groff for the Handbook. Off the top of my head I'll list a few : 1. How would you identify the first occurrence of each technical acronym in the Handbook so that it could be rendered with a mouseover definition or link to the glossary in hyper-text versions of the Handbook (only the first occurrence because these presentation details would be distracting and make it difficult to read if applied to every occurrence). 2. How do you programatically extract all of the Armenian FTP sites mentioned in a groff version of the Handbook? (so they can be listed on the web site separately). 3. How do you pull in content from other sites on the net and dynamically include parts of it each time you rebuild the document in a structured way? (e.g. the way we pull in external RSS feeds on the website, the way we pull in the results of the latest kernel stress tests to add to the release TODO page, etc..) 4. How do you render the same content in multiple presentation styles in the same output format? E.g. maybe one web based version with one color scheme for the website, and another web based version with a different layout and color scheme? Or one with per-chapter table of contents and one with only a per-book table of contents for a printed format? All configurable with make flags to the build script and with the key separation of content and presentation since different people with very different skill sets will be responsible for those two tasks in general. 5. How do you generate texts for electronic book readers, open office, or other modern formats? I use groff occasionally, but am a novice, so I am sure there are solutions to some of these problems, but the ones I know of are clearly sub-optimal. > Groff even produces html, and it does a really bang-up job of formatting ASCII > text pages, something which xml tools have never been able to do. I just don't Sure, but those are basic output formats we've supported for a decade with XML based tools. What about Amazon Kindle ebooks? Mobi ebooks? OpenOffice documents? We distribute more than just those three very basic output formats. > get the reason to go with xml, except a bad case of follow the leader. What's > the benefit that the users, or even the authors, accrue? And don't fail to Why don't you ask the publisher of the book you just cited. Or better yet, the author of groff, James Clark, that moved on to write most of the open source SGML/XML tools we use in building the handbook. I must admit to not following him closely and only reading his blog rarely -- did he work for Microsoft or something? Still trying to find where that connection comes in. > realize that our groff cames with a set of ancillary tools like "pic", to be a > very good job of doing technical drawings. That's what Richard Stevens did, so > don't argue that it's either impossible, or even difficult to do well. If you > argue this, please drop all the marketing propaganda, drop all references to Richard Stevens is a highly technical network engineer. He created great figures as people often do with pic. Whether you are using groff or LaTeX or XML tools however you can hardly argue that manual editing of a programming language is a better way to generate diagrams than a graphical tool for most needs. Sure I get great figures with pic or pstricks but some of my best figures are drawn with OmniGraffle in a fraction of the time. > God, the amount of marketing crap that has gone out to push dynamic features > (which web pages really do need) upon paper authors is impressive, but I never > saw any use of this in any piece of fiction, or even in any technical > dissertation, anything not destined for presentation via paper. Many companies > depend on this for their future, so I'm skeptical. This seems to change the scope of your argument significantly. If you are now conceding the general usefulness of XML for things like Handbook and only saying it is overkill for a paper-only document then I'd tend to agree. I'd go straight to LaTeX, but many would go straight to groff. To each his own. Kind of makes me wonder why all the ranting about newegg.com and microsoft and evil xml vendors. > Show me a book which needs these features, a book that would be better written Any book published by O'Reilly -- because they need to publish not just PDFs but hyperlinkable electronic book versions in addition to dead tree versions. > to a complicated monstrosity (which our handbook did) was a mistake in strategy, > trying to go the popular way. Making it so the number of folks who can format > the sources is limited to folks which have the resources. You've done a very poor job in this rant of pointing out any advantages to using groff for the Handbook over DocBook XML, and I think you know this which is why you sent it to an unrelated list. I will grant you that you listed one solid advantage in this mail. The tools use less disk space. I assure you that your points will be discussed and listened to if you try again without all the ranting and weird logical fallacies and if you post it to the appropriate place, doc@FreeBSD.org. Thanks! - Murray From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 24 22:49:56 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B785D106567A for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:49:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from murray@stokely.org) Received: from mail-ew0-f21.google.com (mail-ew0-f21.google.com [209.85.219.21]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55F5F8FC12 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:49:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from murray@stokely.org) Received: by ewy14 with SMTP id 14so190843ewy.19 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:49:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.210.139.15 with SMTP id m15mr1940667ebd.69.1232837395360; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:49:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20090124224237.GA96097@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> References: <497B77C7.90001@telenix.org> <2a7894eb0901241353l56be13b4s9860b9e949bc9ec2@mail.gmail.com> <20090124224237.GA96097@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:49:55 -0800 Message-ID: <2a7894eb0901241449y49391f6aj6414875e8781ea4@mail.gmail.com> From: Murray Stokely To: Frank Shute , Murray Stokely , Chuck Robey , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: text formatting tools. X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:49:57 -0000 Yea, that is a good point. The one last thing I meant to add was that in general I think we have plenty of people in the doc project that can work to render the documentation and work on the stylesheets and presentation and such. What we really need is simply more authors. Text can be submitted in plain text with no markup at all in groff, xml, or anything else through the mailing lists or PR database. There are plenty of volunteers that can mark up the text and get it committed. - Murray On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Frank Shute wrote: > On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 01:53:38PM -0800, Murray Stokely wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Chuck Robey wrote: > > > > Another advantage of XML is greater familiarity with the toolset > amongst the target authorship. > > I dare say a number of people have tackled the similar HTML/XHTML/CSS > for authoring on the www, whereas few have tackled a manpage or > suchlike. > > With regards a huge toolset, for the FreeBSD docs you don't need TeX > to produce the HTML version. The HTML can also always be converted to > postscript using, for example, Firefox for hardcopy. > > Apologies for the big snip but I didn't particularly want to reply to > any one point & wanted to avoid redundancy. > > Regards, > > -- > > Frank > > > Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html > > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 24 23:06:50 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08784106566B for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:06:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from frank@esperance-linux.co.uk) Received: from mailout.zetnet.co.uk (mailout.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.231]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B30BB8FC17 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:06:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from frank@esperance-linux.co.uk) Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] helo=zetnet.co.uk) by mailout.zetnet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LQrDE-0007Xt-VK; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:42:49 +0000 Received: from melon.esperance-linux.co.uk (54-144.adsl.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.54.144]) by zetnet.co.uk (8.14.1/8.14.1/Debian-9) with ESMTP id n0OMgjfd001084; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:42:46 GMT Received: by melon.esperance-linux.co.uk (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C9589FCA6A0; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:42:37 +0000 (GMT) Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:42:37 +0000 From: Frank Shute To: Murray Stokely Message-ID: <20090124224237.GA96097@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Murray Stokely , Chuck Robey , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org References: <497B77C7.90001@telenix.org> <2a7894eb0901241353l56be13b4s9860b9e949bc9ec2@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2a7894eb0901241353l56be13b4s9860b9e949bc9ec2@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Face: *}~{PHnDTzvXPe'wl_-f%!@+r5; VLhb':*DsX%wEOPg\fDrXWQJf|2\,92"DdS%63t*BHDyQ|OWo@Gfjcd72eaN!4%NE{0]p)ihQ1MyFNtWL X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.4-RELEASE-p2 i386 X-Organisation: 'http://www.shute.org.uk/' X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.1.7 (zetnet.co.uk [194.247.46.1]); Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:42:47 +0000 (GMT) Cc: Chuck Robey , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: text formatting tools. X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Frank Shute List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:06:50 -0000 On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 01:53:38PM -0800, Murray Stokely wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Chuck Robey wrote: Another advantage of XML is greater familiarity with the toolset amongst the target authorship. I dare say a number of people have tackled the similar HTML/XHTML/CSS for authoring on the www, whereas few have tackled a manpage or suchlike. With regards a huge toolset, for the FreeBSD docs you don't need TeX to produce the HTML version. The HTML can also always be converted to postscript using, for example, Firefox for hardcopy. Apologies for the big snip but I didn't particularly want to reply to any one point & wanted to avoid redundancy. Regards, -- Frank Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html