 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 15:35:55 -0500, "Nathan Kopp" <Nat### [at] Kopp com>
wrote:
>What would be the desired format for MegaPov documentation for Windows and
>Unix?
HTML would be good for me, except one person said that MS-Word's HTML
conversion tool doesn't work very well. I've seen similiar conversion
tools from other companies, and they didn't work very well either.
Is it too hard to write the docs in HTML to start with? This would
certainly solve cross-platform issues. I think there are even HTML
browsers for DOS users. HTML is probably the most portable option of
all.
I think it might also be nice to allow end-user modification of the
help file. If the help file is in a modular HTML format, it would be
possible for the end-user to add some new pages, correct a typo on an
existing page, or make whatever personal notes they wanted. It would
become more of a personalized "workbook" in a sense. I can't do these
things to a PDF, PostScript, or Windows Help document.
As for the Word Processing formats you listed, I personally can read
and edit any of those, but I don't think they are very portable across
different platforms.
As for Windows users of MegaPov, it might be nice to simply launch a
Windows Help file, but I can easily live without this if it will be
too much work to create.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 15:35:55 -0500, Nathan Kopp wrote:
>
>What would be the desired format for MegaPov documentation for Windows and
>Unix?
>Some other format that I could easily generate from a MS Word file using
>free tools.
DocBook! DocBook! (no free tools available yet, though, so you'll
have to write your own. :) )
--
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote:
>
> >What would be the desired format for MegaPov documentation for Windows and
> >Unix?
>
> I'm pretty attached to HTML, preferably with CSS, layers, frames, and the
> whole shabang... My second choice would be PDF.
Just to comment on that, layers aren't supported by many browsers, e.g.
mozilla does not support this netscape HTML-enhancement.
Just a note
Axel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 15:35:55 -0500 "Nathan Kopp" <Nat### [at] Koppcom>
wrote:
>What would be the desired format for MegaPov documentation for Windows and
>Unix?
HTML or .pdf.
I like .pdf for the official POV-Ray because it preserves example
images, section numbers, and one can 'pagedown' through the document.
Having one large document makes it easy to perform a search for
keywords.
--
Alan - ako### [at] povrayorg - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker wrote:
>
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 15:35:55 -0500, Nathan Kopp wrote:
> >
> >What would be the desired format for MegaPov documentation for Windows and
> >Unix?
> >Some other format that I could easily generate from a MS Word file using
> >free tools.
>
> DocBook! DocBook! (no free tools available yet, though, so you'll
> have to write your own. :) )
>
Just wanted to support that one. Oh, when you want to write your tools,
look for:
http://www.sgmltools.org/ This is unix piece of software, and a bit
dead (and outdated). Get current docbook at http://www.docbook.org/ ,
they have all important links. They have stylesheets as well, so IE and
mozilla should be able to read .sgml directly. Be sure to look at
http://www.nwalsh.com/ , he's on of the XML gurus, member of W3
commities, IIRC. And http://www.jclark.com/ , he's author of expat, one
of the most commonly used XML parsers (expat), and jade, transforming
engnine. As I surf, jade is available on WIN32, so here your free tools
go. (sgmltools is just a package with nice scripts to call jade).
What a Ken'ish reply that is.
Axel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Axel Hecht wrote:
> What a Ken'ish reply that is.
And a good one it was. I'm glad someone keeps track of programming
links because I just don't have the time or experience to keep up
with them and evaluate their worth.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well, yet another comment on formats, pdf uses the unisys patented
compression (like gif's), so having free tools that use the compression
features of pdf are probably illegal. And therefor dangerous.
Or you don't have compressions, that will result in file length equiv to
those of Postscript (without the messy bitmap files, ps sucks at those,
pdf supports jpg and png IIRC)
Axel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alan Kong wrote:
>
> I like .pdf for the official POV-Ray because it preserves example
> images, section numbers, and one can 'pagedown' through the document.
> Having one large document makes it easy to perform a search for
> keywords.
A few months ago I would have disagreed but now I can only support .pdf.
It's quite useful as an online doc. I like the official one very much
now.
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 24 Jan 2000 14:25:43 +0100, Axel Hecht wrote:
>Ron Parker wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 15:35:55 -0500, Nathan Kopp wrote:
>> >
>> >What would be the desired format for MegaPov documentation for Windows and
>> >Unix?
>> >Some other format that I could easily generate from a MS Word file using
>> >free tools.
>>
>> DocBook! DocBook! (no free tools available yet, though, so you'll
>> have to write your own. :) )
>>
>As I surf, jade is available on WIN32, so here your free tools
>go. (sgmltools is just a package with nice scripts to call jade).
Just to clarify: I meant that there aren't any free Word-based tools
available yet. That shouldn't be a hindrance, though, as you can
write DocBook fairly easily in your favorite text editor.
--
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Schimmler wrote:
> A few months ago I would have disagreed but now I can only support .pdf.
> It's quite useful as an online doc. I like the official one very much
> now.
I don't mind .pdf all that much but the only free tool that I know of
to read them (Adobe Acrobat) really sucks big time in my opinion.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
