[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope3-checkins] SVN: Zope3/trunk/doc/security/SecurityTarget.txt - removed rst document in favor of latex

2005-04-20 Thread Florent Guillaume
Gh  Why oh why ? The document is now totally unreadable, except
by reading a generated .ps or .pdf. That's not the way to go for
documentation :(

Florent

PS: also the add/remove should be in the same svn changeset.

Christian Theune  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Log message for revision 30036:
- removed rst document in favor of latex
   
 
 Changed:
   D   Zope3/trunk/doc/security/SecurityTarget.txt


-- 
Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France)   CTO, Director of RD
+33 1 40 33 71 59   http://nuxeo.com   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope3-checkins] SVN: Zope3/trunk/doc/security/SecurityTarget.txt - removed rst document in favor of latex

2005-04-20 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 09:42, Florent Guillaume wrote:
 Gh  Why oh why ? The document is now totally unreadable, except
 by reading a generated .ps or .pdf. That's not the way to go for
 documentation :(

Remember that this document has to be read by an independent third party and 
they want nicely layouted pages, which I think they have a right to demand. 
ReST can just not provide that, but LaTeX can. Also, for simple (in terms of 
layout) documents like this, they are still readable in LaTeX source form.

Regards,
Stephan
-- 
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics  Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope3-checkins] SVN: Zope3/trunk/doc/security/SecurityTarget.txt - removed rst document in favor of latex

2005-04-20 Thread Christian Theune
Hi,

* Stephan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050420 15:59]:
 On Wednesday 20 April 2005 09:42, Florent Guillaume wrote:
  Gh  Why oh why ? The document is now totally unreadable, except
  by reading a generated .ps or .pdf. That's not the way to go for
  documentation :(

Ok. I should have made the change set come together.

But I don't consider LaTeX to be unreadable.

 Remember that this document has to be read by an independent third party and 
 they want nicely layouted pages, which I think they have a right to demand. 
 ReST can just not provide that, but LaTeX can. Also, for simple (in terms of 
 layout) documents like this, they are still readable in LaTeX source form.

Right. Additionally we have a couple of large and complex tables around
that ReST simply can't handle. It's less for having nice stuff than
having a system that can actually handle it. Also, very likely the
document is going to be split in multiple files because it's pretty
large right now.

Cheers,
Christian

-- 
Christian Theune - gocept gmbh  co. kg - http://www.gocept.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - phon: +49 3496 30 99 112 - fax: +49 3496 30 99 118
schalaunische strasse 6 - 06366 koethen - germany


pgpa0TuUHW280.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope3-checkins] SVN: Zope3/trunk/doc/security/SecurityTarget.txt - removed rst document in favor of latex

2005-04-20 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Christian Theune wrote:
Hi,
* Stephan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050420 15:59]:
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 09:42, Florent Guillaume wrote:
Gh  Why oh why ? The document is now totally unreadable, except
by reading a generated .ps or .pdf. That's not the way to go for
documentation :(

Ok. I should have made the change set come together.
But I don't consider LaTeX to be unreadable.
That's because you're a LaTeX crack. :)
Remember that this document has to be read by an independent third party and 
they want nicely layouted pages, which I think they have a right to demand. 
ReST can just not provide that, but LaTeX can. Also, for simple (in terms of 
layout) documents like this, they are still readable in LaTeX source form.

Right. Additionally we have a couple of large and complex tables around
that ReST simply can't handle. It's less for having nice stuff than
having a system that can actually handle it. Also, very likely the
document is going to be split in multiple files because it's pretty
large right now.
I admire LaTeX's typesetting capabilities. I despise of LaTeX because of 
its missing content model. Nearly all semantic value of a document's 
contents is lost into some cryptic language that isn't even about 
semantics but about layout.

Having said that, I fully understand that people who work on complicated 
things (and the CC spec demands a certain layout from this document, so 
even layouting this *is* a complicated task) chose the tools that help 
them and that they can work with best.

Btw, for my book I used DocBook XML which is not about layout at all but 
provides a sane and easily parsable (it's XML!) content model. Using 
XLST you can go anywhere, for example PDF (first to xslt-fo and then 
with FOP or similar to PDF) or even to LaTeX (which is what I did for 
the book). But, again, it's a matter of taste, too.

Philipp
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com