Now, I don't want to go off chasing another rabbit, but there is one point
about published documents that I would like to make. That's that I think a
complete document should be archived as a complete document. Lack of this
unity is the reason or at least a majorly contributing factor in why the
LINUX documentation is so screwed up, out of sync with itself, and out of
sync with the software to which it applies. If people can fiddle with
individual pieces of a document in its "library" then it's not long before
it's corrupted. That's a positive feature for the single-document
indivisible archive approach I prefer. Once you have possession of a copy,
you're at liberty to fiddle with it all you want, but not at the source.
I spent the better part of a year trying to get complete documents from
Sunsite and other loci when I had the urge to learn about LINUX. It seemed
that EVERY PARAGRAPH was a separate file . . . what a PAIN. There I sat,
50 computers, 35 TB of storage available half a dozen available DS3's for
internet traffic, and I had to type one character for every ten I
downloaded, or so it seemed.
There's got to be a better way. Please tell me what it is.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Max Eskin <max82_at_surfree.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Monday, June 07, 1999 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents
>I'll respond to several parts of this thread at once...
>
>>> >will serve everyone. In this case, that means plain ASCII for the
text.
>>> >For the images or graphics, that's a bit trickier, but GIF format is
about
>>> >the widest deployed graphics format out there.
>
>I recommend PostScript at least as an option, since it's inside every
>laser printer and many inkjets. If the system can display GIFs, it's
>probably capable of displaying most modern formats. If it can't, the GIF
>file likely would have to be converted to PS for printing anyway.
>
>>> Well, I don't, and for the reason that lowest common denominator means
the
>>> lowest efficiency for the most people. I want to make it easy and
>>> accessible to as many people as possible. Based on statistics, that
means
>
>It's not about 'many people' at all. You're catering to a technical
>audience that is capable of making sense of the datasheets.
>
>>> that the only OS that really matters is . . . now say it along with me
. .
>
>How many shares of MICROS~1 stock do you own?
>
>>> As far as I'm concerned, what's most important is that the documents be
>>> stored as complete, separate, and single files. They should not be
broken
>>> up into pages or chapters or text in one part and graphics in another in
the
>
>Why is that? If necessary, they can be put together with tar or PKZIP
>(though you probably are only familiar with WinZip). If you're after
>neatness, don't bother. Again, an audience that knows what to do with
>datasheets can figure it out.
>
>>A PDF file can't change that. If you want to re-draw all the images in
>>some CAD system, go ahead. But if you're just going to scan them, all you
>>end up with is bitmaps, no matter what file format you eventually store
>>them in.
>
>If it's a circuit schematic, it may be possible to design a program to
>interpret the bitmap and make an object-oriented graphics file (or use an
>existing one - Photoshop-like programs may have the proper filters).
>
>--Max Eskin (max82_at_surfree.com)
> http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is
Power
>
Received on Mon Jun 07 1999 - 20:10:48 BST