 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
what everyone thinks.
Good idea .... or bad?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povray org> wrote:
> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
> what everyone thinks.
>
> Good idea .... or bad?
>
Bad, I think. Some people cannot read documents properly on screen. If you are
green and want to preserve a tree for a hug. Then don’t print it out. :P
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/17/09 07:07, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
> what everyone thinks.
>
> Good idea .... or bad?
Bad.
--
DO NOT REMOVE THIS TAG (UNDER PENALTY OF LAW)
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Holsenback wrote:
> Good idea .... or bad?
Certainly keep the pdf for people with ebook readers.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
> what everyone thinks.
>
> Good idea .... or bad?
>
> Jim
Bad idea. Everyone should have the option to print out the documentation if it
meets their needs. It shouldn't be up to POV to force a 'green' policy on the
end users. Besides, there are always ways of circumventing the restrictions if
one really wishes to do so.
By providing only electronic versions (not mailing out paper copies) POV has met
its own green requirements and clear conscience. It should be up to the
individual as to what their own personal green agenda is.
At best perhaps include a discalimer to the docs urging people not to do so
unless absolutely necessary, much as people add to their email sigs these days
(From our work email sigs: Please consider the environment before
printing this e-mail)
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Holsenback wrote:
> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
> what everyone thinks.
There is a good reason why they exist, and I think it would be an extremely
bad idea to drop them. They are essential.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Holsenback escreveu:
> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
> what everyone thinks.
>
> Good idea .... or bad?
no problem for me. I used to read povray docs via elinks on a terminal. :)
I can't believe the amount of people who open a doc and the associated
tool, than print the doc so they can read while working on the same
display it was previously!!
I've been reading on displays all day long for years and still no glasses!
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:26:56 -0300, nemesis wrote:
> Jim Holsenback escreveu:
>> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript
>> printable versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct
>> a poll to see what everyone thinks.
>>
>> Good idea .... or bad?
>
> no problem for me. I used to read povray docs via elinks on a terminal.
> :)
>
> I can't believe the amount of people who open a doc and the associated
> tool, than print the doc so they can read while working on the same
> display it was previously!!
I'll probably start doing that, because ....
> I've been reading on displays all day long for years and still no
> glasses!
... I was able to say that for years, but a few months ago I was
diagnosed with anisometropia and now wear glasses (very weak
prescriptions for both eyes, but it's enough to have stopped my headaches
for the most part).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Holsenback wrote:
> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
> what everyone thinks.
>
> Good idea .... or bad?
We can always plant more trees.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4a38dc71$1@news.povray.org...
> Good idea .... or bad?
Bad idea.
Reading from paper is always easier (flipping for/backwards; cross refering)
than scroll through screens. And anyway, the 'green' part of this is only
cosmetic really: most paper is recycled (in my country about 90 %) and paper
nowadays is made from production trees that are constantly replaced.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bad. I really prefer the printouts, but you could think of dividing the document
up into smaller chunks to discourage people from printing the whole document
when they will only be using part of it (go greenish..)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote in message
news:web.4a38e634647a8f185fd99d9e0@news.povray.org...
> > Good idea .... or bad?
> >
>
> Bad, I think. Some people cannot read documents properly on screen. If you
are
> green and want to preserve a tree for a hug. Then don't print it out. :P
>
> Stephen
Good point .... my dev system HAD smallish crt screen until recently. I was
constantly increasing the font size when using web browser. The crt
developed a high voltage "tic" and I found a used 17" LCD to replace it ...
What a difference going to 1280x1024 resolution.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Mueen Nawaz" <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote in message
news:4a38fa2b@news.povray.org...
> > Good idea .... or bad?
>
> Bad.
Because?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:4a390dd7$1@news.povray.org...
> > Good idea .... or bad?
>
> Certainly keep the pdf for people with ebook readers.
Is pdf format more popular than postscript? I'm going to hazzard a guess and
say yes?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:web.4a3918d4647a8f1881c811d20@news.povray.org...
> > Good idea .... or bad?
>
> Bad idea. Everyone should have the option to print out the documentation
if it
> meets their needs. It shouldn't be up to POV to force a 'green' policy on
the
> end users. Besides, there are always ways of circumventing the
restrictions if
> one really wishes to do so.
true enough!
> At best perhaps include a discalimer to the docs urging people not to do
so
> unless absolutely necessary
probably not a bad idea, although my motivation was more along the lines of
"why write/port code that you don't have to"
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:4a391e01$1@news.povray.org...
> There is a good reason why they exist, and I think it would be an
extremely
> bad idea to drop them. They are essential.
Do any specifics come to mind?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message
news:4a393571$1@news.povray.org...
> > Good idea .... or bad?
>
> I can't believe the amount of people who open a doc and the associated
> tool, than print the doc so they can read while working on the same
> display it was previously!!
I usually don't print docs either, but have to admit that there are times
that I do print certain items and use the margins for notes.
>
> I've been reading on displays all day long for years and still no glasses!
5 years ago had to start using glasses for reading/computer work ...
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
news:4a393a1b$1@news.povray.org...
> and now wear glasses (very weak
> prescriptions for both eyes, but it's enough to have stopped my headaches
> for the most part).
same here .... headaches almost immediately gone!
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"John VanSickle" <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:4a399266$1@news.povray.org...
> We can always plant more trees.
>
> Regards,
> John
Ah ... then I must be doing my part. I'm in the 3rd year of an oak tree
project :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote in message
news:4a39f086$1@news.povray.org...
> And anyway, the 'green' part of this is only
> cosmetic really: most paper is recycled (in my country about 90 %) and
paper
> nowadays is made from production trees that are constantly replaced.
>
> Thomas
Yes and I generally recycle all my printouts when I'm done with them.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"joost_1972" <joo### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:web.4a39fd70647a8f188456e1010@news.povray.org...
> Bad. I really prefer the printouts, but you could think of dividing the
document
> up into smaller chunks to discourage people from printing the whole
document
> when they will only be using part of it (go greenish..)
Good idea that's worth looking into .... Thanks
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> "joost_1972" <joo### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
> news:web.4a39fd70647a8f188456e1010@news.povray.org...
> > Bad. I really prefer the printouts, but you could think of dividing the
> document
> > up into smaller chunks to discourage people from printing the whole
> document
> > when they will only be using part of it (go greenish..)
>
> Good idea that's worth looking into .... Thanks
Please don't.
For software that comes with a GUI (like POV-Ray for Windows), my preferred
choice of information source is - usually - the online help (if only because I
always know exactly where to find it).
For software that does *not* have a GUI (like POV-Ray for Unix), my preferred
choice of information source is one single PDF file. (As for collections of
HTML files, they're an inferior substitute: Aside from them typically being
ugly, you can't full-text-search them that easily. And please don't suggest man
pages - I'm just *using* Linux, I'm not *living* it :P)
No need to print it out that PDF. Just having it sit there, ready to be fired up
(on my secondary display), is enough. No need killing trees for me - but yes,
please do a PDF. A single one.
With a proper TOC, please.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
news:web.4a3a25ad647a8f18e01952250@news.povray.org...
> For software that does *not* have a GUI (like POV-Ray for Unix), my
preferred
> choice of information source is one single PDF file. (As for collections
of
> HTML files, they're an inferior substitute: Aside from them typically
being
> ugly, you can't full-text-search them that easily. And please don't
suggest man
> pages - I'm just *using* Linux, I'm not *living* it :P)
Yes, I would agree the the html solution is cumbersome and I prefer the
single pdf method myself. Don't worry man pages isn't even on the radar :-)
> No need to print it out that PDF. Just having it sit there, ready to be
fired up
> (on my secondary display), is enough. No need killing trees for me - but
yes,
> please do a PDF. A single one.
>
> With a proper TOC, please.
.... but of course!
Thanks Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/18/09 05:44, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> "Mueen Nawaz"<m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote in message
> news:4a38fa2b@news.povray.org...
>>> Good idea .... or bad?
>> Bad.
>
> Because?
Because of all the reasons others listed. Why should we force consumers
to go green? It won't work. Those who wish to print will either just use
some other software or shall find a way to print it. Someone will simply
take the HTML docs and put it into one page and make a PDF out of it,
and provide it for others.
--
Free advice is seldom cheap.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
> what everyone thinks.
>
> Good idea .... or bad?
>
If one google search uses enough electricity to boil a cup of tea, then keeping
one recycled-paper printout for a lifetime versus googling every time you have
a syntax question (guilty, here) could be more green.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Holsenback wrote:
> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript printable
> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to see
> what everyone thinks.
>
> Good idea .... or bad?
>
> Jim
>
So you want people to burn coal instead??
-Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
SharkD wrote:
> Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> I'm considering making a proposal to drop the pdf and postscript
>> printable
>> versions of the documentation, but first I'd like to conduct a poll to
>> see
>> what everyone thinks.
>>
>> Good idea .... or bad?
>>
>> Jim
>>
>
> So you want people to burn coal instead??
I prefer to burn government regulations. Those seem to be in unlimited
supply.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
