[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Authorship

"der.hans" wrote:

>I agree with this one. I just can't think of a case where
could be
giving us good information, but not know how to d/l a file.

The references were to HOWTOs on how to set up your modem
connect with an
ISP. I'm a good example. My modem is working under Windows,
but I
haven't as yet
got it working under Linux.

>I think that could be worded better, but saying that
is a good
solution when writing on m$ is fine. We need to add info on
support is to be used, etc. Gary's working on that. I doubt
look at
it as other than Linux I've only used AIX and Solaris in the
4 years

It has something that probably only emacs has on Linux.
Correction: WP also has
it on Linux. An extensive and powerful macro capability. It
distinction with Word and emacs that the macro capability is

arcane, hard to use,
and unpredictable. Emacs may be better. I'm still working on
first, an SGML
beautifier. Later ones should go faster. Anything you can
you can macro.

I agree with the idea of putting legacy tools in appendices.

That's what
appendices are for.

>The screen shots also have to have text to replace them.
have a link
the the replacement text. I don't always have pictures as an

option. Yes,
I actually run X on my desktops, but I'm not always reading
from a
desktop. I wouldn't usually be reading the HOWTO-HOWTO from
elsewhere, but might
have need, especially from a PDA.

Much as I feel for folks who don't have graphics capability,

graphics are an
integral part of modern publishing, for good reason. They
convey a
lot of
information fast, sometimes in a way no other method can
match. I
think that a
placeholder on display devices that are incapable of showing

graphics is what we
should do. For those without a sense of history, we're no
supporting model
33 teletypes. The ascii terminals you do have usually
emulate a
VT100, a 1970's
DEC terminal. Even those were capable of dot-matrix

>Also, with that generalization one presumes that we should
math. A calculator can do it, so we don't need to. Learning
is one
way to learn logic. Also, I don't always have a calculator
and for
things where I need some math done it's too slow.

Human beings should do what human beings are good at, which
thinking. They
shouldn't be wasting their time doing something mechanical
that a
machine can do.
There are now problems so huge no one in their right mind
considers doing
without help. There's no reason to eschew that help for
problems, even
though with great pain and effort we can train ourselves to
what a collection
of diodes can do. Human time and effort are too valuable to

>>> I do not think it (WP) is "a good reason for having a
>> machine".

>No reason for not describing both. Personally, I think the
reason" part should be left out. It's more that WordPerfect
is an
when on m$, here's why and how to use it...

Actually, I think the fact that you can have multiple OSs is
good enough reason
to have a multi-boot machine. But then, I'm an OS junkie.

I do have a huge collection of software for Windows, and
investment is one
of the reasons I use Windows. However, the reason part can
be left
out, maybe
with the mention that some people may have reasons for using

Windows for some
purposes, and we support that.

I think the rest of your comments are self explanatory.


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org