Hi! Gour a écrit : 03/04 13:42

Taco> The availability of ConTeXt books will not automatically create Taco> more users (nor even automatically create readers, for that Taco> matter).

Hmm, interesting...

If even you think that ConTeXt books are not important (to bring new users), then no wonder we do not have even a single one...

I think Taco didn't say *at all* that books are not important; he just said that the books will not automatically increase the use. 03/04 14:13

However, it might be that ConTeXt prefer to always stay niche-product and to, as Haskellers say: "Avoid success at all costs.” :-)

Do you know many software in development for which there are plenty of books. Further the accusation of somes other that Hans is keeping information for his work and not documenting it is shocking me. Hans said that he did develop ConTeXt for *his* work and then opened it to others to benefit. And Hans is working for the ConTeXt users free and would prefer, I think, to use his "secret!!?" tools and go on for his real work. I also regret that the documentation is not complete and updated for mkiv, but mkiv is still in development even if it is operational (but Hans suggest to use mkii for professional work). Many people here who complain about documentation, also quickly say that they do not have time to write the asked for book: they have other things on the fire!! just... like Hans who is developing ConTeXt and do not have time writing documentation. What is more important: having a very good program and wait for its documentation, or a very good documentation and a buggy program??? Thanks to those who develop ConTeXt and answer the questions. Have a good Eastern time Alain

Hi! Gour a écrit :

On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 14:45:51 +0200

...

...

...

...

...

> "Alain" == Alain Delmotte wrote: >

Alain> I think Taco didn't say *at all* that books are not important; Alain> he just said that the books will not automatically increase the Alain> use.

So you think that having book(s) will leave the number of the ConText users on the same level or maybe decrease it?

Can you read a sentence in full and not always cut out what doesn't interest you, or should I mark every word as important? I did write "will not automatically", I didn't say that books will leave the number of users on the same level.

Alain> What is more important: having a very good program and wait for Alain> its documentation, or a very good documentation and a buggy Alain> program???

(user) docs brings new users... (dev) docs brings new devs... (some) users become devs... (more) devs increases bus-factor...

Sure, once you have a full operational system! (user) docs brings new users.... who get problems from bugs or unfinished program... users drop out! No more devs, no more need for books!! And the publishers will thing like this! Alain

Sincerely, Gour

------------------------------------------------------------------------

___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________

Gour a écrit :

On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 16:03:34 +0200

...

...

...

...

...

> "Alain" == Alain Delmotte wrote: >

Alain> Can you read a sentence in full and not always cut out what Alain> doesn't interest you, or should I mark every word as important?

Excuse me...it's my mistake...I had to enclose my sentence in:

\startirony ... \endirony

:-)

And I get an error for a \flameoff (without corresponding \flameon) Regards, Alain

Sincerely, Gour

------------------------------------------------------------------------

___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________

On 3-4-2010 12:54, Andreas Schneider wrote:

Michael Saunders wrote:

...

Mojca's point, that Context is commercial, may be the key: it can be free in name only but if the means of using it are kept secret, it's only of benefit to Pragma. (Hans himself mentioned earlier that there are many undocumented options for use in-house only that outsiders see in the code and wonder about.)

If you spend some time on the mailing list your probably make the contrary observation. There are countless cases where Hans, Taco or Wolfgang implement some features to fulfill a request of a user. Nearly every time I had a question/problem, a solution came up within _hours_. That's quite impressive imho. That also means that many solutions can be found by searching the mailing list archives ... not few things are also mentioned in the Wiki. And for the very basic problems, the "old" manuals still mostly apply.

I do think that it would be pretty awesome to have a central up-to-date documentation which I could also recommend to other people I try to convince to use ConTeXt instead of Word, Writer or LaTeX. But at least for my personal needs I find answers to most of my questions already.

it could be a user effort to document the new stuff posted on the list Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

Taco Hoekwater wrote:

Michael Saunders wrote:

...

Taco's objection that no one helps with the community project to update the reference manual is reasonable, but also predictable: strangers cannot simply wander in and write the book. The knowledge is in Hans's head (and maybe a few others), and only they can communicate it. It's evident that they either can't or won't.

Some feedback on the quality other than 'it sucks' would have helped enormously.

I'll elaborate a bit (excuse me for replying to myself). Over the past four years, it has been next to impossible to get people interested in the reference manual project, not even for something as simple as reading the rewritten chapters and telling me what they think about it. Still, at the same time, complaints about the quality of the documentation have been a constant recurrence on the mailing list. I know the argument that beginners do not understand the source well enough to write a manual themselves is valid. But it is equally true that a person that *does* know the source enough to write the manual is not the correct person to proofread it. The near total lack of feedback had led me to believe that most complainers are in it just for the complaining. This is extremely demotivating, and so I have almost given up on doing documentation at all. I mean, what's the point if nobody really cares? There are many more interesting things to do in life than work for weeks on end on revising chapters nobody appears willing to read anyway. Best wishes, Taco

Taco wrote: ============== Over the past four years, it has been next to impossible to get people interested in the reference manual project, not even for something as simple as reading the rewritten chapters and telling me what they think about it. Still, at the same time, complaints about the quality of the documentation have been a constant recurrence on the mailing list. I know the argument that beginners do not understand the source well enough to write a manual themselves is valid. But it is equally true that a person that *does* know the source enough to write the manual is not the correct person to proofread it. The near total lack of feedback had led me to believe that most complainers are in it just for the complaining. This is extremely demotivating, and so I have almost given up on doing documentation at all. I mean, what's the point if nobody really cares? There are many more interesting things to do in life than work for weeks on end on revising chapters nobody appears willing to read anyway. Best wishes, Taco ==================== Hi Taco Just a few words of encouragement :-) You can be assured that the reference manual is definitely not going unused. In my current quest to learn LuaTeX I refer to it almost daily. Just for the record, I work in scientific publishing but my interest in LuaTeX is purely and completely personal and not at all related to my "day job". I too would be willing to help "improve" the manual, especially to help clarify issues which may be difficult for a beginner (like me!) to understand. I have some ideas for additional material which could help to link or bridge a number of key topics/concepts in order to better understand the "architecture" of LuaTeX. Sort of "glue material". You are absolutely right to say that, as the person writing the code, it is extremely difficult to be the one solely responsible for preparing the manual. Apart from anything, with such a pround and in-depth knowledge of the innards of TeX it must be extremely difficult for you to step back and take the perspective of someone who is just stating out. And, frankly, writing documentation of any sort can be pretty dull. Furthermore, I think that we'd all benefit from you spending most of your time doing what you do best: cutting the code! As someone very new to LuaTeX, I also want to thank you again for the tremendous work you are doing. Do please contact me by personal e-mail to discuss the above in more detail, should you wish to do so. Warm wishes Graham