On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 20:10:43 -0600
Michael Saunders
You mean like the beginner's manual
http://www.pragma-ade.com/general/manuals/ms-cb-en.pdf
and the user manual
...
amongst 46 others by Pragma
No, not like those. I mean like a real manual. I read the book about Hasselt---a few examples without explanations. I've looked at most of the fifty or so documents over which this virtual manual is supposed to be spread. They are about as informative. Most of these documents seem to be 5--12 years old. The wiki is even more patchy. The idea that a computer manual is something that exists implicitly in the discussions of a mailing list is a new idea to me.
You can't be serious about "mk.pdf" being a manual. Even it admits, "This document is not so much a users manual as a history of the development." Little after that point is intelligible.
Compared with the clear, abundant documentation of the LaTeX world, ...
LoL I have a good meter of books about Latex. But Latex is 'congenitally' unable to do what I want to obtain. Within 6 months, with the Seroul book & the Context Manual & the help of this list, I made more and better than in 10 years of Latex. With Latex you must accept to do what Latex wants to be done. With Context (and even with the older Tex), you are free (not free in an denglish sense ('gratuit', 'kostenfrei'), but 'libre' or 'frei').
Context seems like a secret that a small club is trying to keep. It's not even clear from the manuals that development is ongoing, much less that there is some advantage in using it.
So, will there ever be a manual to MK IV? In how many years?
I think that the usersd need that the '[...,...,...]' should be replaced or referenced by lists of parameters and we need a wiki-glossary of the params. So we need a wiki to which users can access. I tried to access t the contextgarden, but my access was forbidden. So it is true that Context is much more better than the way its access is managed. -- René Bastian www.pythoneon.org www.musiques-rb.org http://www.soundsurvey.org.uk/