The footnotes serve to reduce the amount of text in the table. If you
put all that information into the table, the table would become much
bigger and would have large areas of empty space. Space is going for
$1000/square inch.
The footnotes are not for completeness. They give only information that
we think a programmer might need to have at hand to solve a problem. If
we have that right, putting the info into a link doesn't really serve:
how would the programmer know what's behind the link, and whether to
click it?
BUT: it has become clear that my model for use of the refcard was
wrong. I thought users would do what I do: print it & laminate it. It
has become clear that they use it from a window on their monitor, and
that links to NuVoc from the refcard are important.
Fortunately, Viktor is working on adding the links.
Henry Rich
On 8/6/2022 9:11 AM, Ian Clark wrote:
Once you start letting-in footnotes (…refugees from the Land of Textbooks?)
where do you stop?
Isn't the proper place for all such supporting information at the far end
of a weblink, which is all you need to display on the card?
There you can show the J Reference Card with spider-lines to the
"footnotes", in the reader's own language, if you will. The webpage can be
adjusted and expanded in the light of hard evidence. Maybe that's the place
to document language-changes since 6.02.
As for multiple coloration, so pretty, and I love it. If color is
available, why not flaunt it? Who cares if it's overused nowadays?
But as many as 7% of the population have color-defective vision (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness#Epidemiology). Many sufferers
go though life without being aware of it: evidence for its redundancy in
the world of reference cards. (The hue component of color, that is.)
On Fri, 5 Aug 2022 at 07:06, 'Rob Hodgkinson' via Programming <
programm...@jsoftware.com> wrote:
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
