discuss: thoughts (and more) on step 1, automation
Subject:
Re: thoughts (and more) on step 1, automation
From:
David Niklas ####@####.####
Date:
5 Feb 2016 16:36:50 +0000
Message-Id: <20160204141708.3052a74c@ulgy_thing>
On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:54:25 Martin A. Brown wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Questions first, then some notes based on observations of current
> state.
>
> Then, finally, my proposal of a change to our toolchain.
>
> > 1. automation: Be able to (re-)process and (re-)publish all of
> > our existing documentation in an automated fashion.
>
> Questions that I'm assuming get resoundingly answered "No, nobody
> cares!":
>
> * Does anybody object to dropping our support for Plucker,
> a quite rare format targetting PalmOS.
>
> * Does anybody object to our dropping support for PS files?
> We would, of course, continue to supply PDF files.
>
> [If anybody actually cares or feels strongly that we should keep
> supplying .PS files, it is not hard to add that....]
<snip>
I think ps is still very important for at least three reasons:
1. PS is ASCII (or it can be so), which compresses well.
2. PS is (was), the standard for printing and I, at least, have a PS
capable printer.
3. PS is, like pdf, all one file and some viewers keep tabs on where you
closed it (pdf is the only other format that supports images and has
viewers that do so (edit: djvu viewers might also)).
4. Often times I find an error (typo), in the file and I can correct it
in the PS doc (before reporting it and praying that the maintainer
is listening/alive/willing to fix it), pdf does not allow this AFAIK.
Sincerely, David
