[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [zzdev] a version of the user's guide
- To: Katariina Ervasti <cat@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [zzdev] a version of the user's guide
- From: Benjamin Fallenstein <b.fallenstein@xxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:14:15 +0200
- Cc: Marlene Mallicoat <MarleneM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ZZ Developers <zzdev@xxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0010251639110.4894-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Because Marlene was so eager to take a look at the
> current state of art of the user's guide I've put
> a version of it in my web directory.
As a beginning, it looks good!
(In the long run, though,
> (I don't know how long it will take 'till we get the WML
> issue settled so --- That's why it's there at the moment.)
Why don't you simply let AJ convert it to WML? Your discussion was
interesting to witness, but I really don't see any reason not to take
that offer. (Well, I *do* think WML is better -- I've layouted a book
some months ago and developed this really nice-looking concept of
showing margins as "coming out of ellipses" -- but it was such a mess to
do that from hand, and do it again when the page layout had changed! So
I very much feel that even for presentational reasons, having the pages
in WML makes much easier. I don't actually have the time to learn WML,
or even find a WML preprocessor that works on my system, but when I add
something to the gzz docs, I look at the code and format my additions
similar to it -- so far it has worked.)
> The doc doesn't look very beautiful, I just put the tags there in
> a hurry.
One thing: could you (as an intermediate) make a page which has all the
figures on it? That would make downloading them all easier.
> And yes, it is very much UNDER CONSTRUCTION. None of the
> guys here has read it yet, I still need to work with the
> language, put some more info there etc.
I feel it should also be organized in different structures, like, making
trails out of it showing how certain structures are build. (That, again,
is something I suspect to be much easier with WML, where the contents
are a bit more separated from the contents.)
> It will be a HUGE document since we want it to cover every
> aspect of the use of GZigZag.
I suppose you do accept submissions -- is there anything where help is
needed? (Like the cell views -- I'm familiar with them?)
By the way, I noticed you say 'colour' -- are you using British English,
some other English, or just some random mix? Not because I'd mind
anything, but when I write something for the UG, it should be
consistent. In order to not make my mind blow, I try to stick to AE and
learn at least that more or less right, but I could try to use BE where
I'm aware of the differences.
> But it will take time to write it, because writing is by no
> means a fast process, finding a clear way to express things
> takes time indeed.
Are you interested in networking on how to explain GZigZag? I really
agree with your earlier comment that gzz has developed a lot of own
language which sounds like buzzwords ("relcells?"), a practice which I
basically resist -- not limited to computer science, I just hate these
people who tell me I have to use latin root words like "Allegorie" and
"Anapher" and "Ellipse" and "Metonoymie" and "Onomatopöie" and
"Oxymoron" because they are "scientific" when there are commonly
understood German words to describe these phenomenons -- but wouldn't
you guess: developing an understandable language isn't always that easy.
:) Point being: I think we actually need to work on that problem
conciously, trying to find better terms/expressions.
I'll need to explain this next year to people who aren't interested in
math or computers very much, so I'd love input on where the complexities are.