I prefer the form with the footnotes near the boxes they are displayed in.
Type size is fine.
The colors are great - especially the modifier trains table.
All the cards are helpful - even to old J'ster's like me.
Cheers
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 8:42 AM Raul Miller wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2022
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:23 AM 'Viktor Grigorov' via Programming
wrote:
> ". ;._1 LF,shell'xclip -o'
(The leading > there is email quoting, and not part of the J expression.)
Or, in jqt:
".>cutLF wd'clippaste'
But ". should take a left argument when importing numbers -- for
proper handling
For those using xclip (xsel, and the like)
# 1. 1--100 LF sep'd; 2. something to ".
seq -w 100 | xclip
printf %s\\n '-1 -2 -3' '11 22 33' | xclip
". ;._1 LF,shell'xclip -o'
there are two other clipboards, would also ease selection, and forgo multiline
line in the console
Aug 10, 2022, 16:20
Usually, when I am working with multi-line numeric constants, I give
the thing a name so that I can use it in multiple sentences.
That said, if I wanted to use the thing and then forget it, and I
didn't have a convenient small expression to express the numbers, I
would probably do your example lik
Jared's post reminded me how awkward it seems to get multi-line numeric
data into J. A job that begs for a direct copy/paste requires more, to me.
I realize that the new direct definition feature simplifies this somewhat,
but I have been looking into this task without such. I don't think the
refer
I use the old ref card printed and laminated on my desk.
My use case; J is my desktop calculator but I want to learn to use it for more.
As problems and queries come in, I will solve them with Excel or Datagrip, but
a repeat calculation I will wonder how to do it in J.
For instance I used the c
I initially wanted to do a plaintext version with ANSI C escape codes; and HTML
one; and the TeX one. The first proved very annoying after two tables; the
second very annoying given special/reserved HTML characters that should be
escaped, and the third almost likewise. An internal and official o
A (probably future) purely online presentation would likely benefit
from "tooltips" (or: hints which are shown on hover)..
--
Raul
On Sat, Aug 6, 2022 at 10:47 AM Ian Clark wrote:
>
> I've been misapprehended. Maybe because I traded precision for terseness. I
> used "footnote" when I meant narr
I've been misapprehended. Maybe because I traded precision for terseness. I
used "footnote" when I meant narrative [text] in general. As opposed to
symbolic [text], which is the real meat of a reference card.
The old 6.02 refcard has very few *footnotes* as such (i.e. narrative
linked to its targe
The footnotes serve to reduce the amount of text in the table. If you
put all that information into the table, the table would become much
bigger and would have large areas of empty space. Space is going for
$1000/square inch.
The footnotes are not for completeness. They give only informati
Once you start letting-in footnotes (…refugees from the Land of Textbooks?)
where do you stop?
Isn't the proper place for all such supporting information at the far end
of a weblink, which is all you need to display on the card?
There you can show the J Reference Card with spider-lines to the
"fo
Joining a group of ’similar responses’, I second the vote Devon (and others)
outlined below.
My only added comment, I printed the 3 pages to compare on paper. Although I
generally use screens I always believe a new user should be able to print/use
what they have as cribs.
This did not work (pl
1-c fnotes below each table
2-c main text could be smaller (see note below)
3-c footnote text could be smaller
4-c I like the coloration
5-d adv names are helpful and cj should have similar
6- don't know. See how it was summarized in the J6.02 Ref Card.
7- Is the use of alternating background gr
1. c. footnotes below each table
2. b. about right
3. b. about right
4. c. like it
5. d. yes, and I would like to see names added for the adverb
6. b. both
Have a wide landscape version as though one would print it on a foldable
card.
On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 4:27 PM Jan-Pieter Jacobs
wrote:
> G
Good job!
I answered the poll in-line below:
Op do 4 aug. 2022 om 17:02 schreef Henry Rich :
> 1. In each document, look at a couple of tables with a footnote, and
> refer to the footnotes. Which layout did you find easiest to use?
> c. footnotes below each table (easier for on-screen viewing,
Clarification for the list:
I wrote:
> 1: a
(That was a mistake -- I had meant the one with paragraph footnotes.)
--
Raul
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
contrary to the answer I gave, I agree:
the names are actually used already so they had better
put on the refcard
And I also agree that some verbs don’t need any explanation.
I thought about putting them in groups more like it’s done
in NuVoc – otoh, if I want to see those relationships, I can
ju
+1 for a landscape version ☺
Am 04.08.22 um 18:18 schrieb Don Guinn:
How about a landscape layout? To see it on a computer screen requires
scrolling unless the text is very small. And the printed version should be
just as easy to use.
1. I found c. easiest to use wrt footnotes
But is this the main question?
I find the other ones easier to use
in general: the footnotes are not
the most frequently looked up parts!
2. c.
3. c.
4. rather c. but I dislike the bold face parts
I could argue about color choice but it’s quite
good al
Multiple refcards is certainly possible. The source for the tables will
be available and anybody who wants to select parts for a refcard is
welcome to do so.
Henry Rich
On 8/4/2022 12:53 PM, Raul Miller wrote:
1: a
2: no opinion (the font was too small on my screen, so I resized it larger)
1: a
2: no opinion (the font was too small on my screen, so I resized it larger)
3: no opinion (for the same reason though it was easier to read by default)
4: I am not sure. I did not find mnemonic value in the colors -- I
think I would have preferred colors where increasing valence
corresponded
Nice work Viktor and Henry! Responses inline.
> On Aug 4, 2022, at 08:01, Henry Rich wrote:
>
> 1. In each document, look at a couple of tables with a footnote, and refer to
> the footnotes. Which layout did you find easiest to use?
> a. footnotes at bottom, 1 column
> b. footnotes at bottom,
1. c. footnotes below each table, second choice: a. footnotes at bottom, 1
column
2. b. about right
3. a. too small (but I will likely just use a viewer window so I can zoom)
4. c. like it
5. d. yes, and I would like to see names added for the adverbs. (As someone
still learning I find them very
How about a landscape layout? To see it on a computer screen requires
scrolling unless the text is very small. And the printed version should be
just as easy to use.
On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 9:01 AM Henry Rich wrote:
> Viktor Grigorov has been busily reworking the old J6.02 reference card.
> The g
By far prefer 1st footnote format. Grouping together lets you read the
footnote and find the reference in the main related section quickly.
Colour coding of adv/conj is good. Wish it was in jqt.
Things seem to generally fit well on page. If more information/columns in some
sections would sti
Viktor Grigorov has been busily reworking the old J6.02 reference card.
The goals of the project are
* show language changes since J6.02
* convert to LaTeX
With the information in LaTeX, it will be easy to change font sizes and
placement. The card can then accommodate new changes, and there c
26 matches
Mail list logo
