On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 23:21 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:30:54 +0200, Buchanan, Stuart  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >
> > I made an effort to make the HTML as simple as
> > possible so it would print OK, but looking at Print
> > Preview on my browser, the images don't paginate
> > properly - some are split over a page-break. Oh
> > well...
> 
> 
> got a rough anywhere to look at ? what browser is giving you split images?
> 
> I generally use tables to format things and I dont see any images getting  
> split:
> http://piments.com/piments/html_chilli-peppers/frontpg.htm
> 
> 
> This is straight html 4, no css or fancy stuff, I find tables is the  
> simplest way to get things to format tidily and to rescale nicely to  
> different screen sizes . I can scale that page to 20,30,50,80 or 100% and  
> my print preview looks clean in Opera. YMMV.

Wino, (seeing we don't know what your real name is)

Historically and even today, print preview of web pages do occasionally
split. Web pages were not intended to be printed. (Can't click on a
hyperlink that is on paper) 

> Like any other tool you have to know how to use it to get the results you  
> want. The nice thing is it lets the user size it as he wants according to  
> his eye-sight and/or paper requirements both on screen and paper and does  
> not make any assumptions about the hardware or OS he is running on.

No, but the web developer/designer usually does. How many web pages have
you seen where the text size is ridiculously small?

The font size used for print is generally 10 or 11 points for most
audiences. A link I found after goggling.
http://desktoppub.about.com/cs/finetypography/ht/type_size.htm (This
link is not very authoritative but looks right from when I learnt
desktop publishing, many moons ago.

> 
> Since FS is open-source, cross-platform software it really does make sense  
> to take a more restrictive approach in producing documentation to support  
> it.
> 

Agreed but LaTex is not restrictive and doesn't take long to start
producing your own document source. I'm happy to look at converting any
tutorial to latex. PDFs are the industry standard for print copies. It's
some of the viewing software that is broken, not the format.

> If several authors produce several tutorials and howtos, several smallish  
> HTML files linked off a central index page gives the widest access to  
> these efforts. Which is presumably the object of the excersize.
> 

AHHHHHGGG. You mean to have several html pages for printing? Where's the
value of an index page in that case. A html based index page will not
have the page numbers, the page numbers will not be sequential across
html pages, etc.

Personally, I'd like a hard copy of the manual for Release 1 of
flightgear as a tangible milestone. Perhaps a copy autographed by the
core FlightGear developers could be auctioned off.

A lot of the arguments that are coming up are showing small examples
rather than say 109 page documents which the Installation and getting
started guide has grown to. I would like a hard copy of the manual for
version 1 of Flightgear (when released). Perhaps a copy signed by the
core FlightGear developers could be auctioned off.

The biggest problem right now is not the document type but the age of
the documentation. Last update in most cases is around 2003 to as early
as 2001. It should be possible to generate a "large print" version of
flightgear.


--
George Patterson
Adelaide, Australia



_______________________________________________
Flightgear-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to