discuss: Thread: intro

Hi

I am paul, a few years I wrote a command reference for the joe text 
editor looking at the ldp project its still there at

http://tldp.org/REF/Joe-Command-Reference/index.html

It seems rather out of date, I have re-done it with lyx, so its in LaTeX 
format, for version 3.5 which is the one that comes with ubuntu 8.10.

I would like to submit this so the site is more up to date,  so can 
submit in
pdf
txt
ps
and probably dvi and which ever other formats lyx can export

Looks like I can't actually export to html which is the format it's in 
at the moment.  I am sure there is a way to do that though.

At present I am still learning to use the editor, so I am sure with some 
knowledge the whole thing can be on 1 sheet of a4 paper, in landscape, 
but I am not that advanced yet.

anyway if its ok to submit for review I will. 

thanks for any help

Paul

-- 
Paul Sutton
www.zleap.net
Support Open file formats ISO 26300 odt
Next Linux User Group meet : Jan 3rd : 2pm,  Shoreline Cafe Paignton

Paul Sutton a écrit :
> Hi
> 
> I am paul, a few years I wrote a command reference for the joe text
> editor looking at the ldp project its still there at
> 
> http://tldp.org/REF/Joe-Command-Reference/index.html

good, thanks.

> 
> It seems rather out of date, I have re-done it with lyx, so its in LaTeX
> format, for version 3.5 which is the one that comes with ubuntu 8.10.
> 
> I would like to submit this so the site is more up to date,

you have a lot of options. The main ones are:

* port your doc to the wiki. We can help you to do so. There you will
ba able to maintain it at will. I don't know if you are cinfident with
such CMS.

* use LyX to produce sgml (linuxdoc) source document. I yet have to
figure out exactly what is the tool chain used by the LDP to manage
this. Certainly submitting through the submit list. David may say if
we use the sgml2xml script to make docbook or some other one.
 I used LyX like this some years ago, and it was not that easy to
create locally (on my computer) all the files (for test purpose)
anyway, the LDP only needs sgml file.

* I don't know (but would like to know) if LyX is able to give docbook
source.

Please don't worry to ask for help, we are on the way of clearing out
the LDP procedures and this a very good example :-)

thanks again
jdd

NB: This seems pretty recent:
http://www.karakas-online.de/mySGML/book1.html


-- 
jdd for the Linux Documentation Project
http://wiki.tldp.org
http://www.dodin.net

On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 10:58:51PM +0100, jdd for http://tldp.org wrote:
> Paul Sutton a ?crit :
> > Hi
> > 
> > I am paul, a few years I wrote a command reference for the joe text
> > editor looking at the ldp project its still there at

One thing that needs to be put back in the manifesto is that LDP
doesn't normally support documentation for one particular application.
Such documentation is supposed to come with the application.  But if
it doesn't or if it needs improvement and the maintainer(s) of the
application software can't provide this, then someone can write an LDP
doc for it.  And I suppose this is the case for the joe text editor.	

It needs to be made clear the LDP's main task is writing documentation
on how to get things done that usually requires more than one application
program.  Regarding the kernel, LDP could rewrite and expand on the
kernel documentation, explaining it to users who are not expected to
know much about the kernel.

[snip]

			David Lawyer

David Lawyer a écrit :

> One thing that needs to be put back in the manifesto is that LDP
> doesn't normally support documentation for one particular application.
> Such documentation is supposed to come with the application.  But if
> it doesn't or if it needs improvement and the maintainer(s) of the
> application software can't provide this, then someone can write an LDP
> doc for it.  And I suppose this is the case for the joe text editor.	

The Joe text editor doc on subject *is* on the LDP for years now, I
don't know how it come, but then we can keep it...

We can IMHO also have doc on single application if the doc have a
different point of view than the standard doc (we must have some added
value) - many official docs lack the "HOWTO" kind of doc.

jdd


-- 
jdd for the Linux Documentation Project
http://wiki.tldp.org
http://www.dodin.net
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1412160445

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 09:06:07AM +0100, jdd for http://tldp.org wrote:
> David Lawyer a ?crit :
> 
> > One thing that needs to be put back in the manifesto is that LDP
> > doesn't normally support documentation for one particular application.
> > Such documentation is supposed to come with the application.  But if
> > it doesn't or if it needs improvement and the maintainer(s) of the
> > application software can't provide this, then someone can write an LDP
> > doc for it.  And I suppose this is the case for the joe text editor.	
> 
> The Joe text editor doc on subject *is* on the LDP for years now, I
> don't know how it come, but then we can keep it...
It wasn't in our mainstream of docs since it was HTML.
> 
> We can IMHO also have doc on single application if the doc have a
> different point of view than the standard doc (we must have some added
> value) - many official docs lack the "HOWTO" kind of doc.

I agree, but someone who knows nothing about LDP (and perhaps little
about Linux) might think that we are supposed to document everything
and then wonder why we don't even try to do so.  Our highest priority
for supplying documentation should be where it involves the
coordinated use of more than one application to accomplish a task(s),
or explains the interactions of hardware with software, etc.

			David Lawyer