Maybe we should start a discussion in a new thread to find out:

1) why users are confused with mkiv/mkii?
2) why they my be reluctant to install the minimals?
3) how to restructure the garden to make things clearer for newcomers?
4) how do users look for information and how to optimise the garden for search 
engine requests?
5) how to better promote context to new/latex users?

Especially answers from new users to the first three points would be helpful to 
answer the fifth point I guess.

>> In general I find it difficult to differentiate between mkiv and mkii 
>> related  information in the wiki. How could we better structure the wiki to 
>> make it easier for the reader? Disambiguation pages, mkiv/mkii sections, 
>> independent pages with mkiv/mkii in headerline?
> Just my 2 cents on this: difficult, because you won't be able to make 
> everybody happy. Every now and then, I see a new user on the list who asks 
> about "installing mkiv" and doesn't realize that it is not really something 
> which you have to install additionally. We shouldn't scare those users 
> because in so many cases, mkii and mkiv are exactly identical, so that would 
> be an arguments against a too stric separation.

I understand the problem.

Having said that, pages like "Using Mark IV" or "Install Mark IV" should be 
renamed to "installing/using context".

Maybe it would help to include a little box "important things to know" on the 
installation page and explain shortly that for historical reasons mkii and mkiv 
are distributed together and that the former is regarded deprecated.  Maybe 
link to a new page: Differences between miiv/mkii and how both are invoked 
(context vs. texexec).

Then I am aware of many people who are reluctant to install the minimals. I now 
wonder why I (myself) was unwilling to install the minimals in the first place, 
having TeXLive installed already. For one it was because of the extra effort. 
But I recall it was also the name "The ConTeXt MINIMAL distribution" that kept 
me. The name "minimal" somehow suggested something incomplete or minor to me. 
It took me a while to figure out that the minimals is actually more than you 
get from TexLive. Therefore, I would suggest leaving out "minimal" and 
advertise the superior instead.

> But of course you're also right that it's frustrating for users if they can't 
> find relevant information for the areas where the two differ. As long as mkiv 
> hasn't settled, this is not easy...

In deed. I guess this has most relevance for people new to context, especially 
those who know latex already and are used to find help easily.

>> We should add criterium=cite and criterium=text to the Wiki (Bibliography 
>> MKIV page:
> You are of course right, but I assume Hans is working on bibliographies right 
> now (he promised to finish something which I need for a project in March, so 
> that leaves him another two weeks ;-), so we should maybe wait a bit.

OK, fine. I'm curious what new feature this will bring to us!

> criterium=cite should work as well, but doesn't right now.
>> In the beginning it was not clear to me, that 
>> refers to the MKII implementation 
>> of Taco. Therefore, I would suggest to rename Bibliography to 
>> Bibliography_mkii and create an alias Bibliography that redirects to 
>> Bibliography_mkiv instead. In the wiki pages Bibliography_mkiv and 
>> Bibliography_mkii the first sentence should state that the page is related 
>> to mkii/mkiv only and link to the other page. Do you think this is 
>> reasonable?
> I had begun rewriting the page. There is now 
> which links to the other pages, 
> and which is linked to on the front page. But another context-related project 
> kept me away from this and I never finished this, so fell free to shuffle and 
> rewrite things!

I see. I was not aware of this page. I usually find information on the wiki by 
searching for: " placepublications". So if there are 
actually  disambiguation pages for mkiv/mkii it makes sense to include 
mkiv/mkii on both pages (not just one).

>> I would like to add a section on customising bibstyle files and add space 
>> for sharing reference styles of different journals. What do you think?
> Again, that's a very good idea, but we should maybe wait just a bit till the 
> dust settles a bit.

All right.


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

maillist : /
webpage  : /
archive  :
wiki     :

Reply via email to