Joining a group of ’similar responses’, I second the vote Devon (and others) outlined below.
My only added comment, I printed the 3 pages to compare on paper. Although I generally use screens I always believe a new user should be able to print/use what they have as cribs. This did not work (please test), you will find the text is “too close” to the left and right paper margins and gets cropped (does not appear) on all 4 edges. Admittedly I am printing on A4 (standard in Australia), and perhaps it works on US Letter (I can’t test). I really commend your work Viktor & Henry, this is very helpful to have updated, thank you. Rob > On 5 Aug 2022, at 8:12 am, Devon McCormick <devon...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 1. c. footnotes below each table > 2. b. about right > 3. b. about right > 4. c. like it > 5. d. yes, and I would like to see names added for the adverb > 6. b. both > > Have a wide landscape version as though one would print it on a foldable > card. > > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 4:27 PM Jan-Pieter Jacobs <janpieter.jac...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Good job! >> >> I answered the poll in-line below: >> >> Op do 4 aug. 2022 om 17:02 schreef Henry Rich <henryhr...@gmail.com>: >> >>> 1. In each document, look at a couple of tables with a footnote, and >>> refer to the footnotes. Which layout did you find easiest to use? >>> c. footnotes below each table (easier for on-screen viewing, where I'd >> use >>> it most). >>> >>> 2. What do you think of the size of the main text? >>> b. about right >>> >>> 3. What do you think of the size of the footnote text? >>> b. about right >>> >>> 4. What do you think of the coloration (indicating part of speech)? >>> c. like it (but I'd double check with a colour-blind person whether it's >>> recognisable / legible) >>> >>> 5. Consider the two tables 'Adverbs' and 'Conjunctions'. The adverb >>> table has a column of menmonic names, the conjunction table does not. >>> Are the names helpful? >>> d. yes, and I would like to see names added for the conjunctions >>> >>> 6. In the Foreigns table, would you prefer to see the system-defined >>> name in addition to/instead of the m!:n value? >>> a. m!:n only >>> >>> 7. Do you have suggestions for formatting? Write them in. >>> >>> >> 0) +1 for landscape mode! >> >> 1) I find it slightly confusing that the footnotes are not in order of >> appearance (the first one on the page is 17), and there are some footnotes >> that appear to be out of sync, but I bet this will be ironed out in the >> final version :). >> >> 2) The arguments table could benefit from a L/R column, there seems to be >> space available for this. >> >> 3) I'm still missing some verbs, but I don't know whether you're (in the >> long run) going for completeness. >> >> 4) The modifier train table takes up a lot of space... I recently >> summarised it for myself as follows by bunching together like cases (I hope >> it comes through, best read in fixed-width font): >> >> Train | Type | Result >> -------------------------- >> [N] V N | noun | apply verb monad [dyad] >> [NV]V V | verb | hook [fork] >> ACV V CV | adv/conj | fork after applying AC. note: *no A V C* >> A A V | conj | (u A) (*v* A) V ; fork if verbs produced >> AC A [A] | adv/conj | ((u AC [v]) A) [A]; apply advs/conjs in order >> NV C NV | any | apply C to produce any part of speech >> NV C AC | adv/conj | NV C (u AC [v]) >> AC C NV | adv/conj | (u AC [v]) C NV >> AC C A | conj | (u AC [v]) C (*v* A) >> AC C C | conj | (u AC [v]) C (u C v) >> NV A | any | apply A to NV >> NV C / C NV| adv | bind to C, partial application >> A V | adv | (u A) V >> A C | adv | (u A) C *u* adverbial hook (e.g. ]: C) >> C0 C1 | conj | (u C0 v) (u C1 v) >> (foot)Notes: >> - AVCN always remain in the result in the order they were in the train >> - A and C can take N or V-> any, so e.g. CC can be verb application instead >> of a hook: 2 (&[.) + is 4 >> - AC is adv hook, opposite order of verb hook (and only 'monad') >> - monad to adverb: (]. [.) e.g. (].[.)> is an adverb opening its left arg >> >> I highlighted in the above with ** what I consider to be less intuitive >> combinations. Maybe it's of use if you'd like to reduce the size of the >> modifier train table. >> >> 5) In the adverb table, the dyadic case of x m&u y -> m&u^:x y is missing, >> and could easily be added as an optional part (as for e.g. ^:). Also, I >> think that u@n should be rendered as u@(n"_); u n would seem to imply that >> the verb is already executed. >> >> 6) Links to NuVoC for each primitive would also be nice for a final >> version, so one can click through for a longer description if needed (when >> used on a computer). >> >> All that said, great job, it looks very pretty. >> >> Keep up the good work, >> Jan-Pieter >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > > > -- > > Devon McCormick, CFA > > Quantitative Consultant > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
