Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:14 AM, Mathieu Lirzinwrote: > Hi, > > Federico Beffa writes: > >> HTML is not better than Info. Here we only need to keep it for >> 'emacs-mit-scheme-doc' to work. This is functionality for mit-scheme >> whereby Emacs looks up the documentation for the identifier at point. >> >> For PDFs, it depends on the type and quality of the manual. If it is >> short and/or poor, then nobody will spend hours reading it. But if the >> manual is good and long, then there is a chance that people will spend >> a lot of time reading it and it would be nice to have a good quality >> environment to read it (again, I'm talking about font graphics >> rendering). >> >> This is analogous to making public buildings suitable for people with >> wheel-chairs, ... may people don't care, until they are affected :-( > > Sorry I don't understand your analogy. IIUC the discussion is about > what should be installed with the default output. Putting the PDF > version of the manual in the 'doc' output will not prevent anyone to use > it. Did I miss something? Well, the discussion is about this sentence: I just realized that its documentation is in Texinfo format. What about simply installing the Info format like we do for other GNU packages, and not the PDF/PS/DVI version? I can't find: why don't we put the PDF/PS/DVI in a different output. If I misunderstood then my bad. But being less cryptic and more explicit would prevent that. Regards, Fede
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Leo Famulariwrote: >> It seems you don't get that my point is not about personal preferences >> or feelings. It's about physical impairments (and there are plenty of >> shades of grays between good sight and completely blind, where big, >> good quality fonts matter). > > Agreed, I know two people with very severe visual impairments who find > it more effective to magnify text to what seems an extreme degree than > to use a Braille reader. Thanks for sharing your experience supporting my claim! Regards, Fede
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
Federico Beffaskribis: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Federico Beffa skribis: >> >>> For PDFs, it depends on the type and quality of the manual. If it is >>> short and/or poor, then nobody will spend hours reading it. But if the >>> manual is good and long, then there is a chance that people will spend >>> a lot of time reading it and it would be nice to have a good quality >>> environment to read it (again, I'm talking about font graphics >>> rendering). >> >> I agree that rendering is much better in PDF. >> >>> This is analogous to making public buildings suitable for people with >>> wheel-chairs, ... may people don't care, until they are affected :-( >> >> I disagree with the analogy. On a computer, I find it simply less >> convenient to browse PDFs than to browse Info, and that outweighs the >> better rendering quality. (As it turns out, Info is also much more >> usable for people using a Braille reader.) [...] > It seems you don't get that my point is not about personal preferences > or feelings. It's about physical impairments (and there are plenty of > shades of grays between good sight and completely blind, where big, > good quality fonts matter). My point about Braille reader is very clearly about physical impairment. I think I do get your point. Ludo’.
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:58:41PM +0100, Federico Beffa wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Ludovic Courtèswrote: > > Federico Beffa skribis: > > > >> For PDFs, it depends on the type and quality of the manual. If it is > >> short and/or poor, then nobody will spend hours reading it. But if the > >> manual is good and long, then there is a chance that people will spend > >> a lot of time reading it and it would be nice to have a good quality > >> environment to read it (again, I'm talking about font graphics > >> rendering). > > > > I agree that rendering is much better in PDF. > > > >> This is analogous to making public buildings suitable for people with > >> wheel-chairs, ... may people don't care, until they are affected :-( > > > > I disagree with the analogy. On a computer, I find it simply less > > convenient to browse PDFs than to browse Info, and that outweighs the > > better rendering quality. (As it turns out, Info is also much more > > usable for people using a Braille reader.) > > > > When I want to read a complete manual, I prefer the paper version, > > though. > > It seems you don't get that my point is not about personal preferences > or feelings. It's about physical impairments (and there are plenty of > shades of grays between good sight and completely blind, where big, > good quality fonts matter). Agreed, I know two people with very severe visual impairments who find it more effective to magnify text to what seems an extreme degree than to use a Braille reader. > > I will install PDFs in a separate output. > > Regards, > Fede >
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
Federico Beffaskribis: > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 7:42 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Federico Beffa skribis: >>> MIT Scheme is a complex system and without the documentation it's not >>> possible to use it proficiently. >> >> Agreed, I didn’t mean to imply we should give up on documentation. >> >> I just realized that its documentation is in Texinfo format. What about >> simply installing the Info format like we do for other GNU packages, and >> not the PDF/PS/DVI version? > > Texinfo is great for looking up pieces of information in a reference > manual. You mean Info, right? > However, when it comes to reading a sizable part, I much prefer PDFs > with a much superior graphic quality and scaling capability and would > like to keep it (my eyes aren't in great conditions). I think we can > drop PS. DVI is not installed. HTML is required by > 'emacs-mit-scheme-doc'. One can choose the font family and size for Info documents viewed in Emacs (or even in a terminal.) :-) I find that Info is much more convenient when reading on a computer because of its interface to navigate the document, search the indexes, and search for words. The thing is, we could make an exception for MIT Scheme and provide PDF and/or HTML in addition to Info. However, what should we do with the whole set of GNU packages? I’m very much in favor of keeping only Info by default, possibly with a few exceptions. WDYT? Ludo’.
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Ludovic Courtèswrote: > Federico Beffa skribis: >> Texinfo is great for looking up pieces of information in a reference >> manual. > > You mean Info, right? yes. > >> However, when it comes to reading a sizable part, I much prefer PDFs >> with a much superior graphic quality and scaling capability and would >> like to keep it (my eyes aren't in great conditions). I think we can >> drop PS. DVI is not installed. HTML is required by >> 'emacs-mit-scheme-doc'. > > One can choose the font family and size for Info documents viewed in > Emacs (or even in a terminal.) :-) I find that Info is much more > convenient when reading on a computer because of its interface to > navigate the document, search the indexes, and search for words. I know that you can choose font and size in emacs and console. But the fact stays that the rendered quality difference is very large. I do not know what to add... Many peoples claim not to see much difference. I and some friends do see a large difference. Obviously the visual-system varies a lot between peoples. As said, I agree that for looking up reference information the Info format is pretty good. > > The thing is, we could make an exception for MIT Scheme and provide PDF > and/or HTML in addition to Info. > > However, what should we do with the whole set of GNU packages? I’m > very much in favor of keeping only Info by default, possibly with a few > exceptions. HTML is not better than Info. Here we only need to keep it for 'emacs-mit-scheme-doc' to work. This is functionality for mit-scheme whereby Emacs looks up the documentation for the identifier at point. For PDFs, it depends on the type and quality of the manual. If it is short and/or poor, then nobody will spend hours reading it. But if the manual is good and long, then there is a chance that people will spend a lot of time reading it and it would be nice to have a good quality environment to read it (again, I'm talking about font graphics rendering). This is analogous to making public buildings suitable for people with wheel-chairs, ... may people don't care, until they are affected :-( Regards, Fede
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
Hi, Federico Beffawrites: > HTML is not better than Info. Here we only need to keep it for > 'emacs-mit-scheme-doc' to work. This is functionality for mit-scheme > whereby Emacs looks up the documentation for the identifier at point. > > For PDFs, it depends on the type and quality of the manual. If it is > short and/or poor, then nobody will spend hours reading it. But if the > manual is good and long, then there is a chance that people will spend > a lot of time reading it and it would be nice to have a good quality > environment to read it (again, I'm talking about font graphics > rendering). > > This is analogous to making public buildings suitable for people with > wheel-chairs, ... may people don't care, until they are affected :-( Sorry I don't understand your analogy. IIUC the discussion is about what should be installed with the default output. Putting the PDF version of the manual in the 'doc' output will not prevent anyone to use it. Did I miss something? -- Mathieu Lirzin
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Ludovic Courtèswrote: > Federico Beffa skribis: > >> * gnu/packages/scheme.scm (mit-scheme): Convert to the 'modify-phases' >> syntax. Add phases 'configure-doc, 'build-doc and 'install-doc. Add >> 'texlive' input. > > Could you split into two patches: first ‘modify-phases’, then build doc? Done. > > I’m a bit concerned about the TeX Live dependency. I wonder if we > should instead make a separate ‘mit-scheme-doc’ package so that people > don’t have to download/build TeX Live just to build MIT Scheme. No > strong opinion though. > > WDYT? MIT Scheme is a complex system and without the documentation it's not possible to use it proficiently. Also, currently there is a single package using mit-scheme as an input (scmutils). For these reasons I do not think that splitting the documentation to a separate package is a good idea. Also, in my opinion giving up on documentation because of the size of the TeXLive package is bad. If anything the problem should be solved at the root, i.e., find a way to split it up. Regards, Fede
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 7:42 PM, Ludovic Courtèswrote: > Federico Beffa skribis: >> MIT Scheme is a complex system and without the documentation it's not >> possible to use it proficiently. > > Agreed, I didn’t mean to imply we should give up on documentation. > > I just realized that its documentation is in Texinfo format. What about > simply installing the Info format like we do for other GNU packages, and > not the PDF/PS/DVI version? Texinfo is great for looking up pieces of information in a reference manual. However, when it comes to reading a sizable part, I much prefer PDFs with a much superior graphic quality and scaling capability and would like to keep it (my eyes aren't in great conditions). I think we can drop PS. DVI is not installed. HTML is required by 'emacs-mit-scheme-doc'. Regards, Fede
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
Federico Beffaskribis: > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Federico Beffa skribis: >> >>> * gnu/packages/scheme.scm (mit-scheme): Convert to the 'modify-phases' >>> syntax. Add phases 'configure-doc, 'build-doc and 'install-doc. Add >>> 'texlive' input. >> >> Could you split into two patches: first ‘modify-phases’, then build doc? > > Done. > >> >> I’m a bit concerned about the TeX Live dependency. I wonder if we >> should instead make a separate ‘mit-scheme-doc’ package so that people >> don’t have to download/build TeX Live just to build MIT Scheme. No >> strong opinion though. >> >> WDYT? > > MIT Scheme is a complex system and without the documentation it's not > possible to use it proficiently. Agreed, I didn’t mean to imply we should give up on documentation. I just realized that its documentation is in Texinfo format. What about simply installing the Info format like we do for other GNU packages, and not the PDF/PS/DVI version? Thanks, Ludo’.
Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation.
Federico Beffaskribis: > From 5c2be0d7d628ba27ac1360cc8e998de68a505b2a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Federico Beffa > Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2015 19:06:37 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: mit-scheme: Generate and install documentation. > > * gnu/packages/scheme.scm (mit-scheme): Convert to the 'modify-phases' > syntax. Add phases 'configure-doc, 'build-doc and 'install-doc. Add > 'texlive' input. Could you split into two patches: first ‘modify-phases’, then build doc? I’m a bit concerned about the TeX Live dependency. I wonder if we should instead make a separate ‘mit-scheme-doc’ package so that people don’t have to download/build TeX Live just to build MIT Scheme. No strong opinion though. WDYT? Thanks, Ludo’.