Subject:
Re: History of LDP
From:
David Niklas ####@####.####
Date:
5 Feb 2016 16:36:50 +0000
Message-Id: <20160204134610.0bec7ef7@ulgy_thing>
On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 15:07:52 David Lawyer wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:50:07AM -0500, Roger wrote:
> > David Lawyer wrote
> > >Publishing ones work on ones own website is not always a good idea,
> > >unless there is someone available to take over the doc if the author
> > >is no longer able to maintain it. And this happens a lot. People
> > >get busy with other activities and sometimes even die.
> >
> > Recently, or within the past year or two, I've been dealing with
> > apparently arrogant and young people who tend to be anti-social with
> > their particular political agenda, while exploiting their
> > distribution's domain names within their email addresses. (ie.
I don't mean to start a war, but I am a "young people" and I don't have
an agenda, political or otherwise, nor do I have a domain name, nor am I
exploiting anyone or anything, AFAIK.
Could you be more clear?
> > Someone's Pythonic culture is better and faster than our lower-level
> > or equivalent language.)
You mean that young people think python is faster then, say, C? That's
baloney, how could anyone (educated), believe that?
Nor is it "better", because HLL are a trade-off, much like various
algorithms (ei. the time memory trade off).
Moreover, often times I find that people think that because you get
"benefits" with HLLs (ei. pointer safety), that the speed reduction is
acceptable since computers are so fast these days.
The problem with the above out look is that you start out with an HLL
project and then you add a glue layer, then you build another app in the
said HLL that uses the glue, etc. Soon you are running a Celeron II
instead of an i3. Try using Calibre, not knowing where to find great tech
news, select 50 sources and hit fetch (make certain that you internet
connection is fast). Hours later you've got a set of epubs. Now try
compiling some latex, say the memoir docs (800pages), minutes later you
have pdf, ps, dvi, txt, and all over kinds of cool stuff.
So, again, what evidence leads you to the conclusion that anyone could
believe such insane things?
> > Choice I have, either keep fighting and complaining while not being
> > provided the required leverage by the younger owners of the companies
> > and organizations, or just publish my writings to my own domain. Why
> > continue aiding a crooked culture?
> >
> > So far, I see Wikipedia on-the-ball with these kinds of anti-social
> > agendas or so-called attacks. Sort of a waste of time being a baby
> > sitter, but this has to be done or else people start fighting over
> > nothing. It's one of those things that sound tedious and time
> > consuming, but certain people are trained to deal with and the
> > situations are rather extremely easy to solve if people are trained
> > to deal with such issues.
This is equally unclear, but perhaps I'm just not exposed the culture
your referring to (I'm still not seeing why younger == wronger).
> > >Another was the wiki problem. People would be more likely to edit
> > >docs if one could just do it without registering. But it takes a
> > >lot of effort to stop spam, including blocking ranges of leased urls
> > >that generate spam. If ldp couldn't find the people to deal with
> > >this, perhaps ldp shouldn't have a wiki. But ldp could have tried
> > >to evaluate non-ldp docs, especially ones on Linux in Wikipedia.
> > >The problem with Wikipedia is that it doesn't allow the original
> > >research which some HOWTO's contain.
> >
> > I tend to agree too, as documentation is sometimes submitted via
> > liaisons, or somebody whom has intimate knowledge of a piece of
> > hardware, but needs to remain anonymous; not due to criminal
> > prosecution or 3rd party licensing conflicts, but for possible future
> > contracts with such companies such as Microsoft.
> >
If I'm smart why would MS (or any other sane person), turn me down?
I've heard of "overqualified", but does that really make a difference
with respect to companies other then the supermarkets and fast food
stores?
> > >Another question is: was not Poet (who advertised his business on his
> > >linuxdoc.com site which also mirrored linuxdoc.org) when he said we
> > >should accept docs in html? Who needs the other formats? If one
> > >needs text, it's trivial to convert html to txt. Accepting docs in
> > >html also means accepting docs in a format that generates html
> > >(linuxdoc, wikis, docbook, etc).
> >
> > I've also written a few instructionals in the early days on other
> > websites, and completely agree. If a person cannot simply use text,
> > using Wiki or docbook is not going to improve their writing any
> > more. (All instructionals tend to originate from a sketched
> > text-only format.) Writing text is the initial and likely most
> > essential step for writing an instructional. However (and sadly),
> > Google is not engineered to categorize *.txt files into their search
> > engine database, tending to require *.html type files.
>
> But Google does incorporate them into its database and one can search on
> words contained in the text document and find it. I know because I
> have a few txt docs on my personal website and Google's "Webmaster
> Tools" show that some people are finding them via Google. I should
> convert them to html and see if I get more traffic for them (-:
The only text docs google ever pointer me to were the rfcs. They may have
changed, though, since I switched to duckduckgo.com 1 year ago. Please
not, though, that google tracks you so it may be deceiving you on purpose
(I have experienced this).
It actually seems to me that listing txt docs is a "conflict of interest"
for google since they can only advertise on html docs AFAIK (example
DSM)
> > A large number of writings for the past centuries only had text! Not
> > too further mention, some of the Wiki headings and indenting has
> > become really horrid when viewing on a monitor or display.
>
> > How about just doing text with some sort of version control
> > system? ;-) Text being extremely easy and first hand knowledge, while
> > something like Git provides security and monitoring of the files
>
> I agree but one nice feature about linuxdoc (seldom used anymore) or
> wikis is that they automatically create a table of contents. If there
> is no such table in a doc, one can as a substitute type in words to
> search the doc but a table of contents is sometimes easier to use to
> find what you are looking for (or for something of interest you were
> not looking for):.
<snip>
May people create their own TOC in txt docs, some of them IMHO are very
pretty :)
Sincerely, David
