* RE: ACM Ada Letters @ 2003-10-10 13:28 Beard, Frank Randolph CIV 2003-10-11 15:02 ` Marin David Condic 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Beard, Frank Randolph CIV @ 2003-10-10 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada I with ya Marin! I've been using OpenOffice for a while now for both documents and spreadsheets. Only one other person in my office has joined me. The rest are using Micro$oft. But, of course, it reads and writes Micro$oft formats without a problem (so far). Frank -----Original Message----- From: Marin David Condic Personally, I have decided to switch to OpenOffice ... [snip] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 13:28 ACM Ada Letters Beard, Frank Randolph CIV @ 2003-10-11 15:02 ` Marin David Condic 2003-10-12 12:42 ` Freejack 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-10-11 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Great! The seeds of Revolution have been planted! Let's all work in that garden and start using OpenOffice to achieve the overthrow of The Evil Empire!!! MDC Beard, Frank Randolph CIV wrote: > I with ya Marin! I've been using OpenOffice for a while now > for both documents and spreadsheets. Only one other person > in my office has joined me. The rest are using Micro$oft. > But, of course, it reads and writes Micro$oft formats without > a problem (so far). > > Frank -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "All reformers, however strict their social conscience, live in houses just as big as they can pay for." --Logan Pearsall Smith ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-11 15:02 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-10-12 12:42 ` Freejack 2003-10-31 20:59 ` Nick Roberts 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Freejack @ 2003-10-12 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw) On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:02:10 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote: > Great! The seeds of Revolution have been planted! Let's all work in that > garden and start using OpenOffice to achieve the overthrow of The Evil > Empire!!! > > MDC Indeed. And lets squash some bugs in OpenOffice in our spare time, eh? In fact, let's each of us find and fix one bug. Just one. As I know most of us are busy, one should be enough. Heh. It maybe not be written in Ada, but parts of it could be eh? Just a thought. Freejack ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-12 12:42 ` Freejack @ 2003-10-31 20:59 ` Nick Roberts 2003-10-31 23:32 ` chris ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Nick Roberts @ 2003-10-31 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw) Freejack wrote: > Indeed. And lets squash some bugs in OpenOffice in our spare time, eh? Well, I use OpenOffice as well. I click on the icon to start it up, then go and make a cup of tea and feed the cat, and sometimes when I come back it's nearly finished loading. ;-) I'm sorry, but I cannot help feeling that OO doesn't just need a few bugs squashing; it needs redesigning and rewriting (in Ada?). I thought StarOffice was great, but as soon as Sun have something to do with a piece of software, you just know it's going to go the way of the Dodo. I use OpenOffice only when nothing else will do. -- Nick Roberts ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-31 20:59 ` Nick Roberts @ 2003-10-31 23:32 ` chris 2003-11-01 3:07 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-01 11:53 ` Ada on the Desktop (was: ACM Ada Letters) Marius Amado Alves 2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: chris @ 2003-10-31 23:32 UTC (permalink / raw) Nick Roberts wrote: > Well, I use OpenOffice as well. I click on the icon to start it up, then > go and make a cup of tea and feed the cat, and sometimes when I come > back it's nearly finished loading. > > ;-) Must be Windows. On Linux I have noticed speed improvements in releases except 1.1 proper, which was a little slower than 1.1rc1. > I'm sorry, but I cannot help feeling that OO doesn't just need a few > bugs squashing; it needs redesigning and rewriting (in Ada?). Perhaps but what's the language got to do with anything? > I thought > StarOffice was great, but as soon as Sun have something to do with a > piece of software, you just know it's going to go the way of the Dodo. Why? StarOffice is made by Sun... :? > I use OpenOffice only when nothing else will do. Agreed. Sometimes even Latex can fail ;) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-31 20:59 ` Nick Roberts 2003-10-31 23:32 ` chris @ 2003-11-01 3:07 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-01 11:53 ` Ada on the Desktop (was: ACM Ada Letters) Marius Amado Alves 2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-01 3:07 UTC (permalink / raw) Well, there's a useful product that might spur some interest in Ada. Something similar to Open Office (which works fine for me - maybe it needs the next generation of hardware. That's part of the conspiracy between the hardware vendors and the software vendors.) would make a good product. But you're clearly talking about something way-big to build. MDC Nick Roberts wrote: > > Well, I use OpenOffice as well. I click on the icon to start it up, then > go and make a cup of tea and feed the cat, and sometimes when I come > back it's nearly finished loading. > > ;-) > > I'm sorry, but I cannot help feeling that OO doesn't just need a few > bugs squashing; it needs redesigning and rewriting (in Ada?). I thought > StarOffice was great, but as soon as Sun have something to do with a > piece of software, you just know it's going to go the way of the Dodo. > > I use OpenOffice only when nothing else will do. > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "So if I understand 'The Matrix Reloaded' correctly, the Matrix is basically a Microsoft operating system - it runs for a while and then crashes and reboots. By design, no less. Neo is just a memory leak that's too hard to fix, so they left him in... The users don't complain because they're packed in slush and kept sedated" -- Marin D. Condic ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Ada on the Desktop (was: ACM Ada Letters) 2003-10-31 20:59 ` Nick Roberts 2003-10-31 23:32 ` chris 2003-11-01 3:07 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-01 11:53 ` Marius Amado Alves 2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Marius Amado Alves @ 2003-11-01 11:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 20:59, Nick Roberts wrote: > Well, I use OpenOffice as well. I click on the icon to start it up, then go > and make a cup of tea and feed the cat, and sometimes when I come back it's > nearly finished loading. And mine often goes beserk making me loose work. And has other non-fatal really stupid bugs. V. 1.0 did not show italics! V. 1.1 solved this but stopped showing quotation marks! I had to change from Times to some uncommon font. And it can't be conviced I am not in USA. And Nick is lucky to have an icon for it. When I click my icon v. 1.0 shows up. To get v. 1.1 I have to open a terminal and execute "soffice". And to install v. 1.1 I had to do it three times. And I still wonder if there are now three installations of it on my system. And... However--and this is sad--, when compared to Microsof Word, considering price (Word hi, OpenOffice zero), it still wins. In Portugal my experience is most people use Microsoft Word but are (illegally) not paying it. So I wonder if there is a market in the middle ground: low price (10 eurodollars), 0 bugs, ease of installation. I have a name for this kind of project: "Ada on the Desktop." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* ACM Ada Letters @ 2003-10-09 14:15 Hyman Rosen 2003-10-10 5:32 ` Marin David Condic 2003-12-06 17:37 ` Colin Paul Gloster 0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Hyman Rosen @ 2003-10-09 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw) I just got my latest issue of Ada Letters. I'm pretty disappointed with the typography errors in many articles. One article had large gaps of whitespace inside words. Another had funny accented characters attached to words. And this isn't the first time I've seen things like that. I know that articles are formatted by the submitters, but shouldn't the editor just bounce malformed ones? These problems make the publication seem amateurish, and may be another symptom of The Death of Ada(tm). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-09 14:15 ACM Ada Letters Hyman Rosen @ 2003-10-10 5:32 ` Marin David Condic 2003-10-10 6:09 ` Hyman Rosen 2003-10-10 7:38 ` Preben Randhol 2003-12-06 17:37 ` Colin Paul Gloster 1 sibling, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-10-10 5:32 UTC (permalink / raw) The paper copy? The on-line copy looks fine. In self-defense, the articles are not formatted by the submitters - you hand it over in .DOC format and the editors tinker with it from there. They may have had some problem between that and getting it to the printer. Look at the stuff at the SIGAda web site and see if thats any better. MDC Hyman Rosen wrote: > I just got my latest issue of Ada Letters. I'm pretty > disappointed with the typography errors in many articles. > One article had large gaps of whitespace inside words. > Another had funny accented characters attached to words. > And this isn't the first time I've seen things like that. > I know that articles are formatted by the submitters, > but shouldn't the editor just bounce malformed ones? > > These problems make the publication seem amateurish, > and may be another symptom of The Death of Ada(tm). > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "All reformers, however strict their social conscience, live in houses just as big as they can pay for." --Logan Pearsall Smith ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 5:32 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-10-10 6:09 ` Hyman Rosen 2003-10-10 15:05 ` Stephen Leake 2003-10-30 21:56 ` Warren W. Gay VE3WWG 2003-10-10 7:38 ` Preben Randhol 1 sibling, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Hyman Rosen @ 2003-10-10 6:09 UTC (permalink / raw) Marin David Condic wrote: > The paper copy? The on-line copy looks fine. In self-defense, the > articles are not formatted by the submitters - you hand it over in .DOC > format and the editors tinker with it from there. They may have had some > problem between that and getting it to the printer. Look at the stuff at > the SIGAda web site and see if thats any better. Yeah, it's the paper copy that's bad. It's fine on the SIGAda site. But the paper copy is the one I read, and it's really annoying to have it malformed. Someone's got to get on the ball. After all, I'm paying for it! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 6:09 ` Hyman Rosen @ 2003-10-10 15:05 ` Stephen Leake 2003-10-30 21:56 ` Warren W. Gay VE3WWG 1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Stephen Leake @ 2003-10-10 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw) Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> writes: > Marin David Condic wrote: > > The paper copy? The on-line copy looks fine. In self-defense, the > > articles are not formatted by the submitters - you hand it over in > > .DOC format and the editors tinker with it from there. They may have > > had some problem between that and getting it to the printer. Look at > > the stuff at the SIGAda web site and see if thats any better. > > Yeah, it's the paper copy that's bad. It's fine on the SIGAda site. > But the paper copy is the one I read, and it's really annoying to have > it malformed. Someone's got to get on the ball. After all, I'm paying > for it! I noticed the same problem. I suggest we _all_ write a letter to the editor, asking them to fix the problem. -- -- Stephe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 6:09 ` Hyman Rosen 2003-10-10 15:05 ` Stephen Leake @ 2003-10-30 21:56 ` Warren W. Gay VE3WWG 2003-11-05 19:14 ` Pat Rogers 1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Warren W. Gay VE3WWG @ 2003-10-30 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw) Hyman Rosen wrote: > Marin David Condic wrote: > >> The paper copy? The on-line copy looks fine. In self-defense, the >> articles are not formatted by the submitters - you hand it over in >> .DOC format and the editors tinker with it from there. They may have >> had some problem between that and getting it to the printer. Look at >> the stuff at the SIGAda web site and see if thats any better. > > Yeah, it's the paper copy that's bad. It's fine on the SIGAda site. > But the paper copy is the one I read, and it's really annoying to have > it malformed. Someone's got to get on the ball. After all, I'm paying > for it! The first few pages were a little rough going. Towards the end, I almost got to feeling that it was normal formatting ;-) -- Warren W. Gay VE3WWG http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-30 21:56 ` Warren W. Gay VE3WWG @ 2003-11-05 19:14 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-06 8:14 ` Preben Randhol 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Pat Rogers @ 2003-11-05 19:14 UTC (permalink / raw) > Hyman Rosen wrote: >> Marin David Condic wrote: >> >>> The paper copy? The on-line copy looks fine. In self-defense, the >>> articles are not formatted by the submitters - you hand it over in >>> .DOC format and the editors tinker with it from there. They may have >>> had some problem between that and getting it to the printer. Look at >>> the stuff at the SIGAda web site and see if thats any better. >> >> Yeah, it's the paper copy that's bad. It's fine on the SIGAda site. >> But the paper copy is the one I read, and it's really annoying to >> have it malformed. Someone's got to get on the ball. After all, I'm >> paying for it! It is indeed very strange. By the way, Word is only preferred in the sense that I cannot handle LaTex or FrameMaker or something like that. People typically want to send their submissions in the format of the tool that produced the document itself. Also, I can make trivial changes for people if they send their submissions in Word. As it mentions in the Guidelines for Authors, PDF is perfectly acceptable, as is Postscript. -- Pat Rogers Technical Editor, Ada Letters progers@classwide.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-05 19:14 ` Pat Rogers @ 2003-11-06 8:14 ` Preben Randhol 2003-11-06 15:10 ` Stephen Leake 2003-11-06 16:24 ` Pat Rogers 0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2003-11-06 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw) On 2003-11-05, Pat Rogers <progers@classwide.com> wrote: > By the way, Word is only preferred in the sense that I cannot handle > LaTex or FrameMaker or something like that. People typically want to > send their submissions in the format of the tool that produced the > document itself. Also, I can make trivial changes for people if they > send their submissions in Word. As it mentions in the Guidelines for > Authors, PDF is perfectly acceptable, as is Postscript. Why can't you handle LaTeX? LaTeX produces both PS and PDF. Preben -- "Saving keystrokes is the job of the text editor, not the programming language." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-06 8:14 ` Preben Randhol @ 2003-11-06 15:10 ` Stephen Leake 2003-11-06 15:36 ` Preben Randhol 2003-11-06 16:19 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-06 16:24 ` Pat Rogers 1 sibling, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Stephen Leake @ 2003-11-06 15:10 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol <randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@pvv.org> writes: > On 2003-11-05, Pat Rogers <progers@classwide.com> wrote: > > By the way, Word is only preferred in the sense that I cannot handle > > LaTex or FrameMaker or something like that. People typically want to > > send their submissions in the format of the tool that produced the > > document itself. Also, I can make trivial changes for people if they > > send their submissions in Word. As it mentions in the Guidelines for > > Authors, PDF is perfectly acceptable, as is Postscript. > > Why can't you handle LaTeX? LaTeX produces both PS and PDF. LaTeX can be complex to install. There is a nice Windows installer, but if an author uses a package that Pat doesn't happen to have installed, it's a problem. If you want to use LaTeX, just create the PDF yourself. That's what PDF is for; document exchange. -- -- Stephe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-06 15:10 ` Stephen Leake @ 2003-11-06 15:36 ` Preben Randhol 2003-11-06 16:30 ` Stephen Leake 2003-11-06 18:10 ` Wes Groleau 2003-11-06 16:19 ` Pat Rogers 1 sibling, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2003-11-06 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw) On 2003-11-06, Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: > > LaTeX can be complex to install. There is a nice Windows installer, > but if an author uses a package that Pat doesn't happen to have > installed, it's a problem. Well the same problem arises if one use a font in word that Pat doesn't have. > If you want to use LaTeX, just create the PDF yourself. Wasn't that what I said? -- "Saving keystrokes is the job of the text editor, not the programming language." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-06 15:36 ` Preben Randhol @ 2003-11-06 16:30 ` Stephen Leake 2003-11-06 18:10 ` Wes Groleau 1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Stephen Leake @ 2003-11-06 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol <randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@pvv.org> writes: > On 2003-11-06, Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: > > > > LaTeX can be complex to install. There is a nice Windows installer, > > but if an author uses a package that Pat doesn't happen to have > > installed, it's a problem. > > Well the same problem arises if one use a font in word that Pat doesn't > have. yes, that's true. And again, using PDF is the solution. > > If you want to use LaTeX, just create the PDF yourself. > > Wasn't that what I said? Hmm. Pat (the editor of ACM SigAda newsletter) said _he_ couldn't handle LaTeX, meaning he cannot accept submissions in LaTeX format. I'm suggesting that if authors want to use LaTeX, that's no problem; they just generate PDF from it, and send the PDF to Pat. I thought you were asking Pat why _he_ couldn't handle LaTeX. I think it is unreasonable to ask an editor to accept LaTeX. -- -- Stephe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-06 15:36 ` Preben Randhol 2003-11-06 16:30 ` Stephen Leake @ 2003-11-06 18:10 ` Wes Groleau 2003-11-07 12:53 ` Marin David Condic 1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Wes Groleau @ 2003-11-06 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol wrote: > On 2003-11-06, Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: > >>LaTeX can be complex to install. There is a nice Windows installer, >>but if an author uses a package that Pat doesn't happen to have >>installed, it's a problem. > > Well the same problem arises if one use a font in word that Pat doesn't > have. Ah, but Word automatically substitutes another font, and Pat can easily change it if it selects an ugly one. -- Wes Groleau http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau/Wes ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-06 18:10 ` Wes Groleau @ 2003-11-07 12:53 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-07 13:14 ` Marius Amado Alves 2003-11-07 22:52 ` Wes Groleau 0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-07 12:53 UTC (permalink / raw) I don't think it would be at all unreasonable for a journal to ask authors to use some specific, common fonts. What's wrong with limiting things to Times New Roman and Arial? Just about everyone can handle that and it would get the job done. Also, it makes for a more consistent looking journal. Its also not unreasonable to restrict submissions to some small set of document formats. After all, while we all have our favorites, you can't expect an editor to have every possible file format supported for *your* convenience. Even non-Word processors can usually make a .DOC and .PDF is pretty common too. That seems like a reasonable restriction. MDC Wes Groleau wrote: > > > Ah, but Word automatically substitutes another font, > and Pat can easily change it if it selects an ugly one. > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "So if I understand 'The Matrix Reloaded' correctly, the Matrix is basically a Microsoft operating system - it runs for a while and then crashes and reboots. By design, no less. Neo is just a memory leak that's too hard to fix, so they left him in... The users don't complain because they're packed in slush and kept sedated" -- Marin D. Condic ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 12:53 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-07 13:14 ` Marius Amado Alves 2003-11-07 14:48 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-07 21:11 ` Robert A Duff 2003-11-07 22:52 ` Wes Groleau 1 sibling, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Marius Amado Alves @ 2003-11-07 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 12:53, Marin David Condic wrote: > I don't think it would be at all unreasonable for a journal to ask > authors to use some specific, common fonts. What's wrong with limiting > things to Times New Roman and Arial? What's wrong is that these fonts are not "common". For example OpenOffice does not have them. So please relax the limitation to Variable size serif font resembling Times, Time New Roman Variable size sans serif font resembling Helvetica, Arial to which I would add Fixed size font resembling Courier, Courier New for source code. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 13:14 ` Marius Amado Alves @ 2003-11-07 14:48 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-07 15:59 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-07 21:11 ` Robert A Duff 1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-07 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw) O.K., but that still only means the editors of a journal really need to support only a small handful of fonts. Times (and its variants for OpenOffice, etc.) Arial/Helvetica (same variants) and Courier (same variants). One ought to be able to load some fonts that are supported for OpenOffice and perhaps some other word processors that don't come shipped with these. I have a pile of fonts that came with my PC and I loaded up a bunch more. Most of the word processing things that run on my PC seem to be able to find that directory and recognize these fonts. Is it different in the Unix/Linux world? When I started using OpenOffice it managed to recognize all my usual PC fonts, including Times New Roman and Arial (and a bunch of wierd ones obtained as freebies from the Internet) so its not impossible to make it work. I don't know what it does in Unix/Linux platforms, but I've got to believe there are equivalents for Unix/Linux that would be good substitutes. So you pick your platform, get a set of acceptable fonts loaded on it and say "This is what I can work with - make sure your submissions comply." BTW, I don't much like Courier & would rather use Lucida Console, but for the sake of commonality, I'd cave in. :-) As for OpenOffice? I like that a lot since it disconnects me from the Microsoft/Borg. Perhaps if more journals, etc., were to start accepting .SXW files we'd get The Revolution started. ;-) MDC Marius Amado Alves wrote: > > > What's wrong is that these fonts are not "common". For example > OpenOffice does not have them. So please relax the limitation to > > Variable size serif font resembling Times, Time New Roman > Variable size sans serif font resembling Helvetica, Arial > > to which I would add > > Fixed size font resembling Courier, Courier New > > for source code. > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "So if I understand 'The Matrix Reloaded' correctly, the Matrix is basically a Microsoft operating system - it runs for a while and then crashes and reboots. By design, no less. Neo is just a memory leak that's too hard to fix, so they left him in... The users don't complain because they're packed in slush and kept sedated" -- Marin D. Condic ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 14:48 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-07 15:59 ` Pat Rogers 0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Pat Rogers @ 2003-11-07 15:59 UTC (permalink / raw) Marin David Condic wrote: [snip] > BTW, I don't much like Courier & would rather use Lucida Console, but > for the sake of commonality, I'd cave in. :-) My personal favorite is Andale Mono. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 13:14 ` Marius Amado Alves 2003-11-07 14:48 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-07 21:11 ` Robert A Duff 2003-11-07 22:10 ` Pat Rogers ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Robert A Duff @ 2003-11-07 21:11 UTC (permalink / raw) Marius Amado Alves <amado.alves@netcabo.pt> writes: > ...to which I would add > > Fixed size font resembling Courier, Courier New > > for source code. Why do we write and read source code in fixed-width fonts? I usually do, and most folks do. But variable width is certainly more readable. For Russ: by "readable", I mean "easier to read". Please don't call me an "idiot" for not being *able* to read fixed-width fonts -- I just find variable-width fonts easier to read. ;-) ;-) - Bob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 21:11 ` Robert A Duff @ 2003-11-07 22:10 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-07 22:18 ` Marius Amado Alves 2003-11-08 12:40 ` Marin David Condic 2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Pat Rogers @ 2003-11-07 22:10 UTC (permalink / raw) > Why do we write and read source code in fixed-width fonts? > I usually do, and most folks do. > But variable width is certainly more readable. I find it easier to format the code (beyond simple indentation, where tabs suffice). For example, it is easy to format the formal parameters in a subprogram or entry specification using fixed-width typefaces. I line up the colons, the modes and the names of the types. Not fun with a variable-width typeface. In the approximately 1000 slides for my Ada courses I used a variable-width typeface on the slides. That made it easy to fit text on the slide that otherwise would have been too wide, among other advantages, but it is a real pain to format. Change the point-size and you have to reformat it all. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 21:11 ` Robert A Duff 2003-11-07 22:10 ` Pat Rogers @ 2003-11-07 22:18 ` Marius Amado Alves 2003-11-08 12:40 ` Marin David Condic 2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Marius Amado Alves @ 2003-11-07 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 21:11, Robert A Duff wrote: > Why do we write and read source code in fixed-width fonts? To align without tabs. Example : array (Index) of Triple := (( 1, 0, 1000), ( 12, 1000, 120), (123, 1200, 99)); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 21:11 ` Robert A Duff 2003-11-07 22:10 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-07 22:18 ` Marius Amado Alves @ 2003-11-08 12:40 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-08 18:38 ` Georg Bauhaus 2 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-08 12:40 UTC (permalink / raw) Well, it might or might not be more readable. Some of that is subjective judgement. I like fixed fonts because it allows me to make things line up in the source code and that often contributes (in my mind - maybe not others) to better readability. Such as aligning parameter lists so everything is in columns or a series of assignment statements with all the ":=" lined up, etc. Sometimes it helps with identifiers as well if they have fixed size fonts to make parts of the names align. Some of that might just be personal taste or an over-organized mind. (Can you say "Obsessive-Compulsive"? I *like* the way you say that!) How would you propose to get that capability with proportional fonts in some manner that still allowed the source to be compilable? (I might imagine a word processor inserting tab stops and other formatting info into the code, but that's not part of the Ada standard and there isn't any guaranteed way to be sure it would be represented the same way by more than one editor.) That's why sometimes just plain old ASCII with proportional font representation is the best way to go - its simple, easy to implement, consistent across numerous apps, etc., and it lets you control format fairly well. MDC Robert A Duff wrote: > > Why do we write and read source code in fixed-width fonts? > I usually do, and most folks do. > But variable width is certainly more readable. -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "Trying is the first step towards failure." -- Homer Simpson ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-08 12:40 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-08 18:38 ` Georg Bauhaus 2003-11-09 12:40 ` Marin David Condic 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Georg Bauhaus @ 2003-11-08 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw) Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> wrote: : How would you propose to get that capability with proportional fonts in : some manner that still allowed the source to be compilable? You produce a piece of formatted code using a computer. A computer programm will easily transform text written in one formal language into a text written in another formal language used in typesetting, be that RTF, GEN, XML, TeX, or whatever :-) Georg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-08 18:38 ` Georg Bauhaus @ 2003-11-09 12:40 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-10 10:41 ` Georg Bauhaus 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-09 12:40 UTC (permalink / raw) Sure, I could always get some form of formatting for publication. Either A) I laboriously translate my Ada code via a word processor and tab stops and whatever else I may need or B) I laboriously write a program to reformat it into Postscript or something else that can be sucked up by some publishing tool while preserving my monospace alignment. (Still doesn't solve the problem of possibly wanting to make things align within identifiers, but perhaps that is not really necessary.) The question is "How do I get that within my Ada code such that its still a compilable thing and is represented consistently by various IDEs?" I thought the idea was to have proportional fonts as part of the programming ritual and the objection was that monospace fonts make it easy to format code. If its handled all through the editor via some algorithm, it probably won't look the same across editors. If it is handled by embedding some formatting information in the code, it would have to be something standard so compilers could ignore it and all editors could handle it the same. MDC Georg Bauhaus wrote: > > You produce a piece of formatted code using a computer. > A computer programm will easily transform text written > in one formal language into a text written in another formal > language used in typesetting, be that RTF, GEN, XML, TeX, > or whatever :-) > > Georg -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "Trying is the first step towards failure." -- Homer Simpson ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-09 12:40 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-10 10:41 ` Georg Bauhaus 2003-11-10 12:48 ` Marin David Condic 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Georg Bauhaus @ 2003-11-10 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw) Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> wrote: : Sure, I could always get some form of formatting for publication. Either : A) I laboriously translate my Ada code via a word processor and tab : stops and whatever else I may need or (A) shouldn't have to be done when there is a parser for Ada :-) Indeed with GNAT you can use -gnatt, to some extent, this could be a starting point. : B) I laboriously write a program : to reformat it into Postscript or something else that can be sucked up : by some publishing tool while preserving my monospace alignment. (Still : doesn't solve the problem of possibly wanting to make things align : within identifiers, but perhaps that is not really necessary.) No, no, no, the alignment can be done (not overriden) by the formatting program, either by respecting the space character count, or by using an alignment algorithm using whatever fonts you have chosen! You type plain characters. The PP program is Ada-aware, and configurable. The PP program makes sure that there is alignment, if and how you want it. No tabbing needed, no changes or additions to source code, leave that to the computer :-) So there is no need for: : The question is "How do I get that within my Ada code such that its : still a compilable thing and is represented consistently by various : IDEs?" I thought the idea was to have proportional fonts as part of the : programming ritual and the objection was that monospace fonts make it : easy to format code. If its handled all through the editor via some : algorithm, it probably won't look the same across editors. Imagine you want to rename on identifier, possibly changing its length in characters. With just "space character formatting" you get into the usual typewriter-style trouble. With a computer program to assist you if you want, in whatever stage, you don't have to think about formatting when you write or change code. Reminds me of the widespread use of spaces, tabs, and pressing RETURN in place of using paragraph styles, automatic indenation, automatic or forced page breaking, automatic keep-together features, etc. that typesetting software and word processors have had for some time know... Georg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-10 10:41 ` Georg Bauhaus @ 2003-11-10 12:48 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-10 15:21 ` Georg Bauhaus 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-10 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw) Georg Bauhaus wrote: > > No, no, no, the alignment can be done (not overriden) by the > formatting program, either by respecting the space character count, > or by using an alignment algorithm using whatever fonts you have > chosen! You type plain characters. The PP program is Ada-aware, How does it know what fonts I have chosen? It either needs to do it on the fly or it needs to store that information with the program text. Same with possible variations in formatting style, etc. Either you rebuild it every time (and no possible consistencey between when done by my program and when done by yours.) or you have to store some information with the file (and then you need a convention for doing that.) > > So there is no need for: > Yes there is - see above. Yes, you can write some formatting tool that might go do some default actions on Ada source text and it might look half-way nice, but the thing is, someone is going to quickly say "I want Times" or "I Want Arial" or I want "Bookman Old Style" - not to mention a wide range of possible formatting styles. Hence either the tool is extremely limited and fixed in what it does or the user has to specify options every time it is formatting some code, or you have to store formatting information with the code - especially if you want to transmit the code to someone else and have them see it the way you did it. I'm not saying it can't be done - but if most Ada programmers wanted some kind of typesetting capability for their source code, it seems to make sense that the best way to do it would be with some kind of markup kept inside the code. That's basically the way most word processors do it. > > Reminds me of the widespread use of spaces, tabs, and pressing > RETURN in place of using paragraph styles, automatic indenation, > automatic or forced page breaking, automatic keep-together features, > etc. that typesetting software and word processors have had for > some time know... Ahhh, the Good Old Days! :-) I *like* plain-old-ASCII and the limited formatting it makes possible. Its simple. It works. And not everything needs to be gold-plated. For program source code, I find it quite adequate and of minimal fuss. For publishing a magazine, its insufficient - but I don't do that very often. Case in point: Once upon a time, if someone wanted to send a memo around to the staff - they might have hand-scrawled it and xeroxed it and had it going around the office in 15 minutes. Now that same someone might spend hours organizing a memo, complete with clip art and graphics and other stuff to make it look really spiffy. It's a *memo*! Not an illuminated manuscript! The object of the game is to communicate the information quickly and inexpensively and yet word processing has probably made for way more wasted energy than we used to have in this area. You can no longer make a resume or a presentation without sophisticated typesetting and graphic arts. I think its overkill. I'm sure there are ways of auto-formatting Ada source text and using proportional fonts, etc. I just don't think its necessarily very useful or something most programmers want to spend their time doing. Even plain-old-ASCII "pretty printers" have their weaknesses - they often don't format in the manner I personally would like or give you other sorts of mysery. (Like why is it GPS won't let me specify 4 spaces for indent instead of the default 3?) They can be useful, but they often are not the norm for many developers. Maybe there are too many elements of taste in formatting to make it possible to cater to everyone with a program? Maybe not all judgements about what looks good can be codified? MDC -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "Trying is the first step towards failure." -- Homer Simpson ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-10 12:48 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-10 15:21 ` Georg Bauhaus 0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Georg Bauhaus @ 2003-11-10 15:21 UTC (permalink / raw) Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> wrote: : : : Georg Bauhaus wrote: :> :> No, no, no, the alignment can be done (not overriden) by the :> formatting program, either by respecting the space character count, :> or by using an alignment algorithm using whatever fonts you have :> chosen! You type plain characters. The PP program is Ada-aware, : : How does it know what fonts I have chosen? It either needs to do it on : the fly or it needs to store that information with the program text. No, there is a mapping from syntactical categories to fonts. (And it is that mapping that you as a user can modify, plus other parameters.) For example, keywords in bold, identifiers in italics, Symbols in a symbol/math font, etc., or everything in a fixed width font, or ... : Same with possible variations in formatting style, etc. Either you : rebuild it every time (and no possible consistencey between when done by : my program and when done by yours.) or you have to store some : information with the file (and then you need a convention for doing that.) This is what (ISO-)standardised style sheet languages are about. You cannot (ever) expect pointwise equal output from different typesetting systems, but you can set up a framework that will allow typesetters to predict the results, and to make necessary adjustments (e.g. due to different papersizes). It will also free the programmer from having to think about formatting, at least if he/she sticks to reasonable convention, like not chosing identifiers longer than about 80 characters. :> :> So there is no need for: :> : Yes there is - see above. Yes, you can write some formatting tool that : might go do some default actions on Ada source text and it might look : half-way nice, but the thing is, someone is going to quickly say "I want : Times" or "I Want Arial" or I want "Bookman Old Style" - not to mention : a wide range of possible formatting styles. Again, see above, and please leave the professional work of typesetting to typesetting professionals. Programmers should concentrate on programming. :-) Well they might have a word in that, to preserve some originality, but they shouldn't have to decide the details, and typesetters might know ways to fulfill an author's wishes so that everyone will like it. : I'm not saying it can't be done - but if most Ada programmers wanted : some kind of typesetting capability for their source code, it seems to : make sense that the best way to do it would be with some kind of markup : kept inside the code. That's basically the way most word processors do it. I don't think so, you don't store compiler flags in source code either. WordPerfect did have formatting switches in the text some time ago, but even back then there was a strong suggestion to not do that: mix text and format. :> Reminds me of the widespread use of spaces, tabs, and pressing :> RETURN in place of using paragraph styles, automatic indenation, :> automatic or forced page breaking, automatic keep-together features, :> etc. that typesetting software and word processors have had for :> some time know... : : : Ahhh, the Good Old Days! :-) I *like* plain-old-ASCII and the limited : formatting it makes possible. Its simple. It works. Yes, but only if used in for typesetting on a monospace only device. : And not everything : needs to be gold-plated. For program source code, I find it quite : adequate and of minimal fuss. For publishing a magazine, its : insufficient - but I don't do that very often. Ah, I had that in mind (Ada Letters). : Case in point: Once upon a time, if someone wanted to send a memo around : to the staff - they might have hand-scrawled it and xeroxed it and had : it going around the office in 15 minutes. Right, and soon there were conventions like marking sections with a '*', for extracting tables of contents, jumping and so on, which is now found in WiKis, demonstrating the pros and cons of informal markup. : You can no longer make a resume or a presentation without : sophisticated typesetting and graphic arts. I think its overkill. Yes. But try $ a2ps -p some_unit.ps some_unit.adb I think the defaults have some drawbacks, but it is quick and easy, for source code only printouts used for off screen studying. : I'm sure there are ways of auto-formatting Ada source text and using : proportional fonts, etc. I just don't think its necessarily very useful : or something most programmers want to spend their time doing. Yeah, programmers shouldn't in general have to do that, but for publications a proper choice of fonts can be useful. But that choice need not be done by the programmer. : Maybe there are too many elements of : taste in formatting to make it possible to cater to everyone with a : program? Maybe not all judgements about what looks good can be codified? Maybe there are just too many programmers who think they are competent typesetters? :-) I think that as soon as you deviate from plain monospaced text you will have to be a competent typesetter. And maybe even when you don't. Georg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 12:53 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-07 13:14 ` Marius Amado Alves @ 2003-11-07 22:52 ` Wes Groleau 2003-11-08 13:01 ` Marin David Condic 1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Wes Groleau @ 2003-11-07 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw) Marin David Condic wrote: > Wes Groleau wrote: > >> Ah, but Word automatically substitutes another font, >> and Pat can easily change it if it selects an ugly one. > > I don't think it would be at all unreasonable for a journal to ask > authors to use some specific, common fonts. What's wrong with limiting No, it's perfectly reasonable. I was merely illustrating that one person's suggested reason (might use a font Pat doesn't have) is not a very good reason for not using Word. A _good_ reason might be "it comes from Microsoft." :-) -- Wes Groleau Guidelines for judging others: 1. Don't attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. 2. Don't attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by ignorance. 3. Don't attribute to ignorance that which can be adequately explained by misunderstanding. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-07 22:52 ` Wes Groleau @ 2003-11-08 13:01 ` Marin David Condic 0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-11-08 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw) Amen, brother! Even if OpenOffice isn't perfect, I can feel reasonably certain that nobody is going to suddenly come out with a file format for the next generation product that is going to a) be incompatible with what I've already built or b) require I spend extra money to convert things or to be compatible with what other people are using or C) have some sort of Engulf & Devour scheme built in to make sure I'm locked in or others have to get locked in or all sorts of information has to be accessible to The Borg or some other invasion of my rights takes place. It might not be a bad idea to make some Ada tools that work off of OpenOffice file formats. It would let Ada play in that arena and Ada would get the benefits of complimentary technology being available. MDC Wes Groleau wrote: > > A _good_ reason might be "it comes from Microsoft." :-) > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "Trying is the first step towards failure." -- Homer Simpson ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-06 15:10 ` Stephen Leake 2003-11-06 15:36 ` Preben Randhol @ 2003-11-06 16:19 ` Pat Rogers 1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Pat Rogers @ 2003-11-06 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw) Stephen Leake wrote: [snip] > If you want to use LaTeX, just create the PDF yourself. Exactly right. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-11-06 8:14 ` Preben Randhol 2003-11-06 15:10 ` Stephen Leake @ 2003-11-06 16:24 ` Pat Rogers 1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Pat Rogers @ 2003-11-06 16:24 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol wrote: > On 2003-11-05, Pat Rogers <progers@classwide.com> wrote: >> By the way, Word is only preferred in the sense that I cannot handle >> LaTex or FrameMaker or something like that. People typically want to >> send their submissions in the format of the tool that produced the >> document itself. Also, I can make trivial changes for people if they >> send their submissions in Word. As it mentions in the Guidelines for >> Authors, PDF is perfectly acceptable, as is Postscript. > > Why can't you handle LaTeX? LaTeX produces both PS and PDF. My use of "handle" above is misleading -- I just don't have LaTex or FrameMaker (etc) installed. PDF is fine but not everyone can produce it. Postscript is convenient for people because just about anything can select a postscript printer and capture the output to a file. I can then convert the postscript to PDF myself. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 5:32 ` Marin David Condic 2003-10-10 6:09 ` Hyman Rosen @ 2003-10-10 7:38 ` Preben Randhol 2003-10-10 12:56 ` Marin David Condic 1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2003-10-10 7:38 UTC (permalink / raw) On 2003-10-10, Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> wrote: > The paper copy? The on-line copy looks fine. In self-defense, the > articles are not formatted by the submitters - you hand it over in .DOC > format and the editors tinker with it from there. They may have had some > problem between that and getting it to the printer. Look at the stuff at > the SIGAda web site and see if thats any better. Why do one in 2003 not use something better than DOC format? Preben ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 7:38 ` Preben Randhol @ 2003-10-10 12:56 ` Marin David Condic 2003-10-10 12:59 ` Preben Randhol 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2003-10-10 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw) Personally, I have decided to switch to OpenOffice - hopefully encouraging a trend that will free us from the stranglehold of Micro$oft and their plans to Enguilf & Devour everything in sight by creating de facto standards that they control and then, once they have the vise-grips on your testicles, they squeeze to control every aspect of your life. (Forgive us our paranoia, for we know what we do! ;-) But be that as it may, the Ada Letters editors want .DOC or .PDF files and, since my article included nothing more than simple text with simple formatting and just a couple of common fonts, .DOC is not really a problem. Besides, OpenOffice will save to .DOC format. MDC Preben Randhol wrote: > > > Why do one in 2003 not use something better than DOC format? > > Preben -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "All reformers, however strict their social conscience, live in houses just as big as they can pay for." --Logan Pearsall Smith ====================================================================== ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 12:56 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-10-10 12:59 ` Preben Randhol 2003-10-10 15:07 ` Stephen Leake 0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2003-10-10 12:59 UTC (permalink / raw) On 2003-10-10, Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> wrote: > But be that as it may, the Ada Letters editors want .DOC or .PDF files > and, since my article included nothing more than simple text with simple > formatting and just a couple of common fonts, .DOC is not really a > problem. Besides, OpenOffice will save to .DOC format. And PDF :-) Preben ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 12:59 ` Preben Randhol @ 2003-10-10 15:07 ` Stephen Leake 2003-10-10 15:50 ` Preben Randhol 2003-10-10 19:44 ` Georg Bauhaus 0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Stephen Leake @ 2003-10-10 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol <randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@pvv.org> writes: > On 2003-10-10, Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> wrote: > > But be that as it may, the Ada Letters editors want .DOC or .PDF files > > and, since my article included nothing more than simple text with simple > > formatting and just a couple of common fonts, .DOC is not really a > > problem. Besides, OpenOffice will save to .DOC format. > > And PDF :-) I'm not clear that PDF would solve the problem of the printer having a different character set. It would be interesting to find out. -- -- Stephe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 15:07 ` Stephen Leake @ 2003-10-10 15:50 ` Preben Randhol 2003-10-30 21:58 ` Warren W. Gay VE3WWG 2003-10-10 19:44 ` Georg Bauhaus 1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2003-10-10 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw) On 2003-10-10, Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: > > I'm not clear that PDF would solve the problem of the printer having a > different character set. It would be interesting to find out. I don't know what was the problem, but as Ada Letters require .DOC or .PDF I just pointed out that it openoffice makes pdf files for you. :-) Preben ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 15:50 ` Preben Randhol @ 2003-10-30 21:58 ` Warren W. Gay VE3WWG 0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Warren W. Gay VE3WWG @ 2003-10-30 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol wrote: > On 2003-10-10, Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: > >>I'm not clear that PDF would solve the problem of the printer having a >>different character set. It would be interesting to find out. > > I don't know what was the problem, but as Ada Letters require .DOC or > ..PDF I just pointed out that it openoffice makes pdf files for you. :-) > > Preben What is disappointing is that _they_ either did not notice, or worse, they just pushed it through like that. I don't know how they could have not noticed it, but.. -- Warren W. Gay VE3WWG http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 15:07 ` Stephen Leake 2003-10-10 15:50 ` Preben Randhol @ 2003-10-10 19:44 ` Georg Bauhaus 2003-10-11 2:59 ` Georg Bauhaus 1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Georg Bauhaus @ 2003-10-10 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw) Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: : : I'm not clear that PDF would solve the problem of the printer having a : different character set. It would be interesting to find out. It should sove the problem, because you can and should store fonts with encodings in PDF files. However, OpenOffice's PDF generator seems not yet troublefree, unfortunately. Ventura 10 does produce good PDF, in various flavours, for Web, printing, ..., not using either of Windows' or Adobe's drivers, afaikt. If you have Adobe's Distiller, you can control which fonts will be stored in the PDF file, subsetted or not. (Subsetting is a font licensing issue.) pdfTeX, xmltex, RenderX's XEP, ... are good PDF generators, too. FOP is not bad. Lout has an option to produce PDF instead of PostScript files. The printing industry seems to have establish a set of rules for using PDF in print, named PDF/X. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-10 19:44 ` Georg Bauhaus @ 2003-10-11 2:59 ` Georg Bauhaus 0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Georg Bauhaus @ 2003-10-11 2:59 UTC (permalink / raw) Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> wrote: : Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: : : : : I'm not clear that PDF would solve the problem of the printer having a : : different character set. It would be interesting to find out. : : It should sove the problem, and I should add that if you own a recent Mac computer with Mac OS X, you get PDF printing for free. (Just checked with a simple text editting tool called TextEdit. This is all plausible because Mac graphics is modelled around PDF internally, reusing NextStep, as it seems.) Georg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-10-09 14:15 ACM Ada Letters Hyman Rosen 2003-10-10 5:32 ` Marin David Condic @ 2003-12-06 17:37 ` Colin Paul Gloster 2003-12-06 22:46 ` Hyman Rosen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread From: Colin Paul Gloster @ 2003-12-06 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw) As suggested earlier in this thread, the appearance of misplaced diacritics instead of characters which are not Latin letters in "Ada Letters" is not the authors' fault judging from the perfect rendition of "An Invitation to Ada 2005" authored by Pascal Leroy in the printing of the December 2002 issue of "Ada User Journal" in contrast to the typical misprints in its "Ada Letters" September 2003 version. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: ACM Ada Letters 2003-12-06 17:37 ` Colin Paul Gloster @ 2003-12-06 22:46 ` Hyman Rosen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread From: Hyman Rosen @ 2003-12-06 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw) Colin Paul Gloster wrote: > As suggested earlier in this thread, the appearance of misplaced > diacritics instead of characters which are not Latin letters in > "Ada Letters" is not the authors' fault judging from the perfect rendition > of "An Invitation to Ada 2005" authored by Pascal Leroy in the printing of > the December 2002 issue of "Ada User Journal" in contrast to the typical > misprints in its "Ada Letters" September 2003 version. Regardless of what software issues caused the misprints, it is certainly the fault of the publishers of Ada Letters to allow such badly printed issues to be sent to their subscribers. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-12-06 22:46 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 45+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-10-10 13:28 ACM Ada Letters Beard, Frank Randolph CIV 2003-10-11 15:02 ` Marin David Condic 2003-10-12 12:42 ` Freejack 2003-10-31 20:59 ` Nick Roberts 2003-10-31 23:32 ` chris 2003-11-01 3:07 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-01 11:53 ` Ada on the Desktop (was: ACM Ada Letters) Marius Amado Alves -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2003-10-09 14:15 ACM Ada Letters Hyman Rosen 2003-10-10 5:32 ` Marin David Condic 2003-10-10 6:09 ` Hyman Rosen 2003-10-10 15:05 ` Stephen Leake 2003-10-30 21:56 ` Warren W. Gay VE3WWG 2003-11-05 19:14 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-06 8:14 ` Preben Randhol 2003-11-06 15:10 ` Stephen Leake 2003-11-06 15:36 ` Preben Randhol 2003-11-06 16:30 ` Stephen Leake 2003-11-06 18:10 ` Wes Groleau 2003-11-07 12:53 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-07 13:14 ` Marius Amado Alves 2003-11-07 14:48 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-07 15:59 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-07 21:11 ` Robert A Duff 2003-11-07 22:10 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-07 22:18 ` Marius Amado Alves 2003-11-08 12:40 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-08 18:38 ` Georg Bauhaus 2003-11-09 12:40 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-10 10:41 ` Georg Bauhaus 2003-11-10 12:48 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-10 15:21 ` Georg Bauhaus 2003-11-07 22:52 ` Wes Groleau 2003-11-08 13:01 ` Marin David Condic 2003-11-06 16:19 ` Pat Rogers 2003-11-06 16:24 ` Pat Rogers 2003-10-10 7:38 ` Preben Randhol 2003-10-10 12:56 ` Marin David Condic 2003-10-10 12:59 ` Preben Randhol 2003-10-10 15:07 ` Stephen Leake 2003-10-10 15:50 ` Preben Randhol 2003-10-30 21:58 ` Warren W. Gay VE3WWG 2003-10-10 19:44 ` Georg Bauhaus 2003-10-11 2:59 ` Georg Bauhaus 2003-12-06 17:37 ` Colin Paul Gloster 2003-12-06 22:46 ` Hyman Rosen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox