A (probably future) purely online presentation would likely benefit from "tooltips" (or: hints which are shown on hover)..
-- Raul On Sat, Aug 6, 2022 at 10:47 AM Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've been misapprehended. Maybe because I traded precision for terseness. I > used "footnote" when I meant narrative [text] in general. As opposed to > symbolic [text], which is the real meat of a reference card. > > The old 6.02 refcard has very few *footnotes* as such (i.e. narrative > linked to its target with a superscript numeral), but it exhibits the same > defect, with too much in-line narrative. > > It's a compromise: more means less, as is the case with color. Too much > narrative and it begins to communicate noise, not information. Bundling-up > the in-line narrative of the 6.02 refcard into actual footnotes showed this > clearly for me. If you had to ask where to put them on the page, my answer > had to be: in another place, i.e. on their own webpage. > > > how would the programmer know what's behind the link, and whether to click > it? > > If you simply replaced every superscript numeral with an asterisk, that > would alert the reader to the link's relevance. I was thinking of only one > weblink printed on the refcard, for the benefit of the handful of > individuals still using (laminated) paper sheets. > > Footnotes (with superscript numerals) are a visually poor way of linking > narrative to its target anyway. If the refcard is going to be viewed > primarily on-screen, clickable, then footnotes are contraindicated. > Spider-lines are better; hypertext is better still. > > So what would I like to see. If the refcard is mainly to be viewed > on-screen, then it no longer needs to bow to the conventions of printed > paper (except for nostalgia). It's just a schematic diagram of symbols, > even if those symbols are textual. A good design would have no narrative, > just clickable symbols. > > But isn't that the heart of J? > > On Sat, 6 Aug 2022 at 14:59, Henry Rich <henryhr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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 > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
