Re: LyX Userguide issues
On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 03:39:56PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Uwe" == Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Uwe> - use the class 'scrbook' instead of 'book' (scrbook has a better > Uwe> implementation of environments and is recommended by TUG and > Uwe> Dante) > > I agree that scrbook is better than book, but are we sure that > everybody will have a working version of it? I mean, not just > everybody with a two years old linux distribution, but really most > people. > > Never forget that the primary goal of the user guide is to be usable, > and that everybody can just print it without tinkering. EXACTLY! > Uwe> - use A4-paper instead of 'standard' > > How does that print on USletter paper? I thought there were still > quite a lot of people using that... If this is the English version of the Userguide, then you have NO business changing the paper to A4. Why? Because no one in North America will be able to print it. We'll lose the lower half of the page. Aber, wenn es die deutche Version ist, is DIN-A4 okay. -- John Weiss
LyX WikiWiki recent wiki posts
Recent wiki posts: (http://wiki.lyx.org/pmwiki.php/Main/AllRecentChanges) 2004-02-24 at 12:56 - Devel.GroupList 2004-02-24 at 13:02 - Site.SidebarDevel 2004-02-24 at 13:02 - Site.SidebarDevel 2004-02-24 at 13:02 - Site.SidebarDevel 2004-02-24 at 14:11 - Site.WebMenuDevel
Re: LyX Userguide issues - update
I also added some comments to Christians Userguide-discussion page: http://wiki.lyx.org/pmwiki.php/DevelDoc/UserGuide regards Uwe
Re: LyX Userguide issues - update
Sorry,
I have forgot something:
The last preamble entry is
% widens the vertical table spacing
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
% set the separation of table columns
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.45em}
I adopted it from the actual Userguide.lyx and don't know if this is
really necessary.
Mike could you possibly tell me something about this?
thanks Uwe
LyX Userguide issues - update
Hello Jean-Marc, Mike and Christian, you convinced me in many points, so that I provide a new, cleaner version. It could be found at http://fkurth.de/uwest/LyX/userguide/ or at http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/LyX/UserGuideA4PDFv2.lyx I named it UserGuideA4PDFv2 and changed the following against my old version: - deleted the footnote stuff in the preamble - the package tocbibind is no longer used, therefore I added the scrbook option bibtotoc (thanks JMarc) - deleted all ERT from the first page - deleted all \texorpdfstring commands. Now you'll get a lot of hyperref warnings in the LaTeX-logfile, but these don't make problems. (The pdf-bookmarks will look ugly) - delete the margin stuff in the preamble. Now scrbooks beautiful print space calculation is used to set the margins. Therefore the margin note in chapter 4.2 will appear correctly and I could remove the footnote after it. - the AMS-package is no longer used. (I introduced it to have the nice \AmS-layout in chapter 5. That a senseless, sorry.) So I hope, that I didn't forget anything and that you find it better ;-) regards Uwe
Re: LyX Userguide issues
As the "former" maintainer of most of the docs, I finally had a chance to have a look. While most of the changes are fine, (and I thank you for taking the time to bring it up to speed), I think John Weiss, the original writer, would "have a cow" if he saw the first page on the screen. There is way too much ERT, making it very hard to read on-screen - the way most people are going to read it. Back in the dark ages, when we argued over this stuff incessantly, we felt that the Tutorial and the User Guide should be as "plain as possible" so that it would be easy to read on screen, and not too unpleasant to look at in print. I think that philosophy needs to be maintained. So while I admire your goal of a linkable, PDF (or print) document, I don't think Userguide.lyx is the file to mangle to get that. I wonder if there wouldn't be some way to write a post-processor to take the LyX file (or the LaTeX output) and insert the necessary commands to handle all the fancy stuff. That way Userguide.lyx could still be plain and readable, while it wouldn't be too onerous to make a pretty PDF file. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: LyX Userguide issues
> "Uwe" == Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I agree that scrbook is better than book, but are we sure that >> everybody will have a working version of it? I mean, not just >> everybody with a two years old linux distribution, but really most >> people. Uwe> The koma-schript classes scr* are standard on all LeTeX2e Uwe> distributions. I think this is indeed true in practice. However, a latex2e distribution only needs to contains what is in the base/ and required/ directories of CTAN:macros/latex, in theory. Let's drop this problem for now, I am probably being too picky. >> I read also that scrbook leans towards european users. Is that >> true? Uwe> I don't know what you mean. The reason why the scr*-classes are Uwe> made is the printing space, see the documentation of koma-script. Uwe> (The printing space is calculated automatically for every page Uwe> dimesion, also for non ISO formats like USletter. (Correct me if Uwe> I'm wrong.)) The section 1.3 of scrguien says that it has been designed to create german documents... Uwe> - use A4-paper instead of 'standard' How does that print on >> USletter paper? I thought there were still quite a lot of people >> using that... I am not sure that a4 is a better default than >> usletter (OK, I agree that it is a better standard, and this is >> what I use). Uwe> I googled and found out, that USletter is 8.5 x 11 inches that is Uwe> in SI-Units: 216 x 279 mm A4 is 210 x 279 mm so this shouldn't Uwe> produce problems. (Maybe I'm wrong with the sizes, could somebody Uwe> check it?) My point was that, while having usletter as format is annoying to us europeans, using a4paper is equally annoying to us users. This is why the choice was made to keep latex default. I can live with a4, though. Uwe> OK seting the margins by hand is always a nasty hack. It is Uwe> better to remove this stuff, because scrbook calculates the Uwe> dimensions automatically, as said above. This has furthermore the Uwe> advantage that the margin note in chapter 4.2 will appear Uwe> correct. OK. >> redefinition of \footnote seems very fragile to me. What about >> setting a value to \footnotesep instead? Anyway I would tend to >> leave document classes defaults as they are, since what one user >> may find ugly may be to the taste of another one. Uwe> \footnotesep doesn't make the job. I don't know why. And you Uwe> convinced me again. It is not really necessary. OK. Uwe> - delete the unneeded declaration of non-T1 encoded characters Uwe> use the package textcomp instead (see also the note above the Uwe> table in chapter 6.6.3) In what latex version was textcomp.sty >> added to base latex? Uwe> Don't know, but the actual version is from 2001/06/05 and the Uwe> .sty says copyright till 1993. (The actual preamble of the Uwe> userguide is from 1997, possibly textcomp wasn't standard at this Uwe> time.) OK, let's use textcomp.sty. Uwe> Could this be done with scrbook options? How? I added this, Uwe> because it is used in the de_* files for years. I think the scrbook options 'bibtotoc' and 'idxtotoc' do what you want. >> Concerning tocbibind itself, it dates from 1998, so one could >> consider that it will be present on any system capable of building >> LyX. Uwe> (actual version is 2003/02/04 v1.5f) Well, it is not on my tru64 system which has an ancient latex from 1997, but I cannot compile lyx on it, either ;) >> I am not sure I like that. Hyperref is great as long as it works. >> There are a lot of horror stories about subtly incompatible >> versions of hyperref, babel, or whatever. Uwe> I met the maintainer of hyperref last week, asked him about Uwe> problems with babel and tocbibind and he denied. I also tested it Uwe> together with usual packages and couldn't see any conflicts. It Uwe> works with the doc, because only tocbibind and babel is used. I Uwe> also tested babel with different languages and the LaTeX-output Uwe> with tex4ht. LaTeX2html has also full hyperref-support. I can agree that current versions of all these packages work well together. What I do not know is what happens with two or three years old versions of these packages. Similarly, not all pdflatex versions are equally capable, from what I understand. >> I'd rather avoid it in the documentations (for the reasons outlined >> above). Uwe> Hey, this was the reason why I provided a new userguide version. Uwe> Linked cross references (in dvi too!) are a dream when you want Uwe> to read large documents. I understand that, my point is just that we should make sure that the documentation can be printed by people who do not have the latest and greatest system. >> If we really want to generate nice pdf docs (and we should >> definitely have some on our site!) we can always use tex2pdf: >> http://tex2pdf.berlios.de/ Uwe> Why don't you want to use the pdftex engine? This is always up to Uwe> date and part of all usual LaTeX2e-distibution. And when you look Uwe> at the tex2pdf page, you can read the
Re: LyX Userguide issues
Uwe> - use the class 'scrbook' instead of 'book' (scrbook has a better Uwe> implementation of environments and is recommended by TUG and Uwe> Dante) I agree that scrbook is better than book, but are we sure that everybody will have a working version of it? I mean, not just everybody with a two years old linux distribution, but really most people. The koma-schript classes scr* are standard on all LeTeX2e distributions. I read also that scrbook leans towards european users. Is that true? I don't know what you mean. The reason why the scr*-classes are made is the printing space, see the documentation of koma-script. (The printing space is calculated automatically for every page dimesion, also for non ISO formats like USletter. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)) Uwe> - use A4-paper instead of 'standard' How does that print on USletter paper? I thought there were still quite a lot of people using that... I am not sure that a4 is a better default than usletter (OK, I agree that it is a better standard, and this is what I use). I googled and found out, that USletter is 8.5 x 11 inches that is in SI-Units: 216 x 279 mm A4 is 210 x 279 mm so this shouldn't produce problems. (Maybe I'm wrong with the sizes, could somebody check it?) Uwe> - set margins (scrbook has a beautiful print space but most of Uwe> the users won't print out the doc. So I used the two-sided style Uwe> but centerd the text in the page for better viewing on the Uwe> screen) I do not agree with this one: setting margins by direct manipulation of \textwidth and fiends is the kind of thing which is frown upon, to say the least. Why didn't you use LyX UI to set the margins? OK seting the margins by hand is always a nasty hack. It is better to remove this stuff, because scrbook calculates the dimensions automatically, as said above. This has furthermore the advantage that the margin note in chapter 4.2 will appear correct. Moreover, it is very subjective to say that people will not print the documentation. I could say that people who do not print the doc will browse it inside LyX and so all the special pdf support if not really needed. You are right. I thought, that most of the users won't print it on paper but will read the userguide in pdf-format, because pdf offers the best way to browse in the document. Uwe> - added vertiacal space between footnotes (when you have more tan Uwe> one footnote at a page, they 'adhere' together) Your redefinition of \footnote seems very fragile to me. What about setting a value to \footnotesep instead? Anyway I would tend to leave document classes defaults as they are, since what one user may find ugly may be to the taste of another one. \footnotesep doesn't make the job. I don't know why. And you convinced me again. It is not really necessary. Uwe> - delete the unneeded declaration of non-T1 encoded characters Uwe> use the package textcomp instead (see also the note above the Uwe> table in chapter 6.6.3) In what latex version was textcomp.sty added to base latex? Don't know, but the actual version is from 2001/06/05 and the .sty says copyright till 1993. (The actual preamble of the userguide is from 1997, possibly textcomp wasn't standard at this time.) I tend to agree that we should use it but, again, we must stay on the safe side. Uwe> - let the index appear in the TOC with the package tocbibind If we are to stay with scrbook, we might as well use the built-in class options that this class provides... Could this be done with scrbook options? How? I added this, because it is used in the de_* files for years. Concerning tocbibind itself, it dates from 1998, so one could consider that it will be present on any system capable of building LyX. (actual version is 2003/02/04 v1.5f) Uwe> - added support for linked cross-references and URLs with the Uwe> package hyperref (you can click on all footnotes, Uwe> cross-references and URLs in dvi or pdf output. The TOC entries Uwe> are also clickable. In pdf output you can furthermore use Uwe> bookmarks) I am not sure I like that. Hyperref is great as long as it works. There are a lot of horror stories about subtly incompatible versions of hyperref, babel, or whatever. I met the maintainer of hyperref last week, asked him about problems with babel and tocbibind and he denied. I also tested it together with usual packages and couldn't see any conflicts. It works with the doc, because only tocbibind and babel is used. I also tested babel with different languages and the LaTeX-output with tex4ht. LaTeX2html has also full hyperref-support. I'd rather avoid it in the documentations (for the reasons outlined above). Hey, this was the reason why I provided a new userguide version. Linked cross references (in dvi too!) are a dream when you want to read large documents. If we really want to generate nice pdf docs (and we should definitely have some on our site!) we can always use tex2pdf: http://tex2pdf.berlios.de/ Why don't you want to use the pdftex engine?
Re: LyX Userguide issues
> "Uwe" == Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Uwe> Hello documentation team, I fixed the documentation to solve Uwe> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1396 Uwe> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1397 Uwe> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1464 Uwe> the document could be found in bug 1464 as attachment: Uwe> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/attachment.cgi?id=530&action=view Hello Uwe, These changes above seem to be good. Uwe> While looking into the file I find out that the preamble was Uwe> changed for the last time in 1997. So I took a closer look into Uwe> the doc and rewrote it in the following way: Cleaning up the preamble is definitely a good idea. Uwe> - use the class 'scrbook' instead of 'book' (scrbook has a better Uwe> implementation of environments and is recommended by TUG and Uwe> Dante) I agree that scrbook is better than book, but are we sure that everybody will have a working version of it? I mean, not just everybody with a two years old linux distribution, but really most people. Never forget that the primary goal of the user guide is to be usable, and that everybody can just print it without tinkering. The rule up to now was to restraint ourselves to the base classes and the packages in the required/ directory of ctan (so for example, babel, amslatex or graphicx are OK). I read also that scrbook leans towards european users. Is that true? I have to admit that the new eu_* (basque) manuals in 1.3.4 use scrbook, but this was an effort to avoid using a class designed only for basque. Uwe> - use A4-paper instead of 'standard' How does that print on USletter paper? I thought there were still quite a lot of people using that... I am not sure that a4 is a better default than usletter (OK, I agree that it is a better standard, and this is what I use). Uwe> - set margins (scrbook has a beautiful print space but most of Uwe> the users won't print out the doc. So I used the two-sided style Uwe> but centerd the text in the page for better viewing on the Uwe> screen) I do not agree with this one: setting margins by direct manipulation of \textwidth and fiends is the kind of thing which is frown upon, to say the least. Why didn't you use LyX UI to set the margins? Moreover, it is very subjective to say that people will not print the documentation. I could say that people who do not print the doc will browse it inside LyX and so all the special pdf support if not really needed. Uwe> - added vertiacal space between footnotes (when you have more tan Uwe> one footnote at a page, they 'adhere' together) Your redefinition of \footnote seems very fragile to me. What about settinga value to \footnotesep instead? Anyway I would tend to leave document classes defaults as they are, since what one user may find ugly may be to the taste of another one. Uwe> - delete the unneeded declaration of non-T1 encoded characters Uwe> use the package textcomp instead (see also the note above the Uwe> table in chapter 6.6.3) In what latex version was textcomp.sty added to base latex? I tend to agree that we should use it but, again, we must stay on the safe side. Uwe> - let the index appear in the TOC with the package tocbibind If we are to stay with scrbook, we might as well use the built-in class options that this class provides... Concerning tocbibind itself, it dates from 1998, so one could consider that it will be present on any system capable of building LyX. Uwe> - added support for linked cross-references and URLs with the Uwe> package hyperref (you can click on all footnotes, Uwe> cross-references and URLs in dvi or pdf output. The TOC entries Uwe> are also clickable. In pdf output you can furthermore use Uwe> bookmarks) I am not sure I like that. Hyperref is great as long as it works. There are a lot of horror stories about subtly incompatible versions of hyperref, babel, or whatever. I'd rather avoid it in the documentations (for the reasons outlined above). If we really want to generate nice pdf docs (and we should definitely have some on our site!) we can always use tex2pdf: http://tex2pdf.berlios.de/ Uwe> - clean up the document: - the TOC pages are numbered roman Why didn't you use \fronmatter/\mainmatter/\backmatter? Uwe> - clean up the bibliography - arrange the doc, so that most of Uwe> the 'overfull \hbox' and font warnings in the LaTeX-logfile Uwe> disappear - rearrange chapter 4.3.1.1 - rearrange chapter 6.6.3 - Uwe> delete the chapter names of chapter 1.2.2.1, 3.4.4.1 and the old Uwe> chapter 5.6.1 (because if there is only a chapter 5.6.1 but no Uwe> 5.6.2, it is unnecessary to have an extra chapter-level) This I like. JMarc
Re: LyX Userguide issues - update
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Hello LyX-doc team, > > I uploaded a better version of my Userguide (named UserguideA4PDF.lyx to > prevent confusion). I've gone over your version, but since there were quite a few changes (in your first post), I've put my comments here: http://wiki.lyx.org/pmwiki.php/DevelDoc/UserGuide instead of replying in the mail here. I think there are still some things to discuss. /Christian -- Christian Ridderström http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
Re: Question to the "Preamble Masters"
Uwe has made an improved version of the LyX User's guide, but IMO we should avoid ERT in the beginning of it (so we don't scare off novices). I would therefore like to ask for help in how to move the ERT insets in the beginning of the attached example into the preamble. The issues involve: * How to get roman pagenumbering of the first pages, and arabic starting with the first section. * How to add a 'hypertarget' and 'pdfbookmark' to the TOC You can remove this stuff if you don't like it. - The roman pagenumbering is not really necessary. I added this for a better book layout in pdf. - It is useful to add the TOC in the pdf-bookmarks, but it's not essential. But why do you think that it scares off novices? In the output you see nothing and in LyX I described every command with a yellow note. regards Uwe
Re: LyX Userguide issues: the diff file
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > >>http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/LyX/UserGuideA4PDF.lyx > > > > There's no point doing a diff... the result is simply twice the size of > > Uwe's .lyx file... > > Diff File see attached You get twice the size if you do a: diff -u which is what's typically used for diffs of source code. (Just in case you wondered why). /Christian -- Christian Ridderström http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
