Daniel Egger wrote:
Am Die, 2003-07-22 um 20.47 schrieb Carol Spears:
I tried to work with simple docbook, docbook, website docbook. I don't know how recent your gimp download is but this format is nothing like gimp since gimp-1.0.2. I have to stretch my imagination so much to make the format fit the gimp.
How so?
this time, i got stuck and pissy when i tried to attach the author email to the authors name. these damn developers keep making babies and such. if they volunteer for writing gimp plugins, they should not need an affiliation to deliver an email addy.
my little layout has a resume area. you can put whatever you
want there except for an affilitation. and if you are as creative with my layout as you need to be with docbook, you
can actually work this information in.
I was actually going to try to substitute <corpauthor> for <email>.
Do you know how deeply the email string is nested in any docbook?
Yes, I know but this is for a purpose. You could also put this information (except it's mandantory) in a normal paragraph; however you don't have the type information in the transformation process later in case you could make some use of it -- like print the Author's name (without emailaddress) on the bottom of every page in the document.
a layout and dtd made for gimp by people who use gimp and need for gimp to document itself and such would be useful for many many applications, i guess.
i am sick of working with choices that were not made for me.
the older i get, the more i need to come up with the answer that
work bests and avoid the real answers. working with docbook
and gimp information is just like this for me. first the extra
reaching (to include the information we need) and then how hard
it is to grab the information back out. this is too much like
real life broken-ness.
where is syngin, btw. you write this as a layout designer. i am writing as someone who tried to actually contribute content with it. i tried to make sensible web site information out of it. syngin would have far more to contribute to any discussion about everyday use and handling volunteers with it.
i think syngin is depressed and gone. i am so sorry about that. i blame docbook and sgml layouts for this, unless i hear something else about it.
your hearsay about usage, my hearsay about being depressed and quitting.
okay. GNU/Image Manipulation Program. gimp can write most of this stuff himself. i however will not hook my gimp up to a
trust me and my recent experience, docbook was not written at all with gimp in mind.
It was written with documentation in mind which is exactly what we need;
I wouldn't use it as a fileformat for images at all.
docbook spew. i have better things to do.
for instance, it is obvious to me that the docbook people could not
imagine an app that can take its own screenshots.
They didn't design this (because it *IS* overkill) but you can certainly express it using the given hooks.
i think i needed more coffee when i wrote this. actually, the screenshots should be easy with gimp, but not with gimp-1.2. i made the unfortunate mistake of starting the mmmaybe resource images with the palettes. palettes don't go to the pdb that way for gimp-1.2. neither do gimp-impressionist resources. i got discouraged.
as much as i love gimp, i wonder if someone got their rent paid
from netscape.com for making that my choice regardless. With
everything else being so sensible in gimp, how come i did not get a choice that included lynx or the awesome w3m? did you know
w3m renders images on xterms lately? that means it could render
any screenshots gimp gets of itself for its help docs.
I cannot imagine how this auto-screenshot feature is supposed to work;
but given that one can do anything within the bounds of imagination and
knowledge I cannot see why it wouldn't....
well, you can download the gimp-web module. my crappy little resource making python scripts make brush images and the html surrounding it. it could just as easily be LaTeX mark up or sgml or xml or cmsl or whatever. gimp just types what he is told to. if he types xml, then i can make it read the urls from one place and it doesn't matter if the url is to a local file or an away site.
maybe it is too simple and you need to be an idiot to use these tools. and i am asking way too much from gimp-developer geniuses.
i hate to limit the scope and imagination though, by being so
disgusted with the docbook* set up.
I can write up a installation documentation for docbook + compilation of
xsltproc in less that 10 comprehensible lines... Remember we're not
talking about DocBook/SGML anywork -- that's a disgusting piece of work.
cool. you will then proceed to author the information and tell others how to author it? awesome!
this is a huge job and someone needs to do it.
work you have already put into this. like i showed you what i had been doing when you asked. i ask again a second time, you
daniel, do you have something to attach to an email? like i did?
What did you have in mind?
should show me twice as much stuff now, i guess.
yes. the easy access to <corpauthor /> was very very self explanitory. as was the lack of <author><email /></author>
no this is what happened. i tried to help, asked a few questions about the logic of the template and what the tags
were *supposed* to mean, and syngin decided it was quicker
and easier to write the documentation without help.
The tags are selfexplanatory, the meaning of them is nicely covered (with examples) in the DocBook-book (the "duck book"). We're not *requiring* any of them execept the structural ones (sects, paras, chapters) however: the more the better.
will you forward all the mail if whatever "information scooper" interested parties use doesn't scoop from information that deeply nested?
lets say that someone at the Vatican would like the Image Map Plugin author to give a presentation and maybe special write some gui for them. i want them to have his email and not dig.
and if he doesn't want to put his email in, i want that also.
i have not really had a chance to look to what is required and not required in that twisted mess (docbook).
but i would like to be extremely clear about this. i am not going
to waste my time contributing to docbook formated information.
however, if you insist on setting the document writers up with
that terrible template system again, i should be able to use
the information anyways as a thoughtfully written xslt can over
look the bad logic and find information there anyways. So what
ever *you* commit, i can use.
See, I already offered to take content in *any* and enrich it using the
appropriate tags. Why? Because I'm not an good content writer because
I'm not creative enough. I know how to deal with DocBook, XML and XSLT
pretty well though.
this tells me that you would have no problem skipping docbook. it is an unnecessary step.
Again: If you want to write, *do it*, send it to me *in any format
convenient for you* and I will merge the pieces. And believe me that I
won't say it another time because I'm starting to get sick of people who
claim wanting to write docs but at the same time complain about the
format and thus have a poor excuse why they cannot....
my format is posted publically. i am scheduled to discuss it after camp. i am thinking about scheduling Neditcon1 for the same week, i dunno yet.
you can look at that and comment. I admittedly am only on chapter three in the xml book, and i need to go back to chapter
two some before proceeding.
since it isn't scheduled for discussion until after camp, i am puttering with my web site and practicing having flamewars on gimp-developer list.
please, do not start this shit on the gimp-user list! they deserve your respect and not this flame shit.
well, we discuss this after camp. being from michigan, i have
also, we don't need the tree or the fruit of docbook, it is huge
and the format is not good for gimp.
Okay, propose a better (XML-) format, write a DTD (yet better also a Schema) *and* XSLT transformation into at least (X)HTML and PDF and I'll call it a deal. Just tell me how long you need...
really only been trained in two of the social skills. gun handling being one of them.
xoxox carol <affiliation>michigan militia</affiliation>
