Subject: Linux-Activists - DOC Channel digest. 93-6-14-23:15
From: "Linux Activists" <[email-masked]>
To: "Linux-Activists" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1993 07:26:09 +0300

Topics:
	 texification vs. latexinfo
	 Re: My views on the Linux FAQ

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Olaf Kirch <[email-masked]>
Subject: texification vs. latexinfo
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1993 02:17:12 +0300

> From: <[email-masked]>

> Wouldn't it be easier to use LaTeXinfo, which is texinfo but with a native
> language of latex instead of tex?

This type of question is about as old as the DOC channel itself.:-) I hoped
my texify tool would settle exactly this sort of argument once and forever.

A
To answer your question:
No. The LaTeX-code uses a bit of TeX wizardry for nice formatting, which
you don't have in texinfo (and I assume latexinfo doesn't have them, either).
Conversion of latex code to texinfo does what I want (i.e. give me an
ASCII version that I may further convert to roff, plain ASCII, etc),
while the original Latex code still looks the way I want. With
texinfo, you either have to accept its style, or leave it.

Slainte,
Olaf

PS: Hope this doesn't start another flame war. How about putting something
like this in an updated LDP manifesto, and post it regularly to the
DOC channel? Matt?

--
Olaf Kirch      [email-masked], [email-masked]

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Grant Taylor)
Subject: Re: My views on the Linux FAQ
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1993 20:06:46 +0300

   Zack Evans <[email-masked]> writes:

   > [email-masked] (Matt Welsh) writes lots of stuff about
   > a new FAQ

   With which I must say I agree.

   > > Perhaps we
   > > do need two FAQ's: one for developers/programmers, and one for users. 
   > 
   > Or a general faq which includes a pointer to the developer/programmer
   > faq.  (But I think I'm arguing nits, so "never mind")

   I think we need to post the FAQ as many parts, each part being one, or
   at most two, sections of the current FAQ.

   For instance, people interested in the 'features' of linux are not going
   to want to know about either GCC MISC INFORMATION or SCSI. EMACS, X11,
   and NETWORKING strikes me as an odd combination as well.

   [etc]

I think this is a better approach.  We could have a single 'meta-faq'
which details what is covered by each 'micro-faq'.  (our meta-faq now
basically does this, but 80% of the info is in the faq anyway, so it's
not the same).  This way, the metafaq could be posted weekly and
reduce the 'where is the faq' and 'where do i get linux' type questions.

I actually have made what i think is an example of what might be
appropriate as a single topic faq portino that fits with this type of
organization - although it's not in traditional faq format, it has a
logical structure and does answer questions relating specifically to
printing and related things.  at 40k, it's a much easier grab for
those who want to know about printing than the whole faq (which until
recently didn't cover anything about it).

just my $.02 :)

-grant

Grant Taylor                                   [email-masked]
Read `how to print under linux' -- get it from cola or mail server:
To: [email-masked]
Subject: send printing.how-to  -or-  Subject: printing.how-to.z.uue
and for a list of other linux printing-related files: 
Subject: help

------------------------------

End of DOC Digest
*****************
-------