RE: [Axiom-developer] LaTeX source of the Rosetta document?

[C Y]

--- Bill Page <address@hidden> wrote:

> On September 17, 2006 11:17 PM C Y wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks Tim.  I added a comment to the RosettaStone page - I can't
> > seem to edit the page itself, perhaps because of the large number
> > of <a href= type entries?
> 
> Yes, probably. We still have the pain caused by spam to deal with. :(
> Right now to edit these pages with many links you must have a Zope
> user id and password.

Ah.  OK. 

> > Is anyone else seeing a problem with the formatting of the comments
> > on the RosettaStone wiki page or is it just my browser?
> 
> No it is not your browser. The formatting was a little strange
> because this page used the old HTML page type. To be formatted
> properly comments would have to be written in HTML. This is a
> limitation of the Zwiki software. But I have just change the page
> type to allow StructuredText so the comments should be ok now.

Thanks!

> This page
> 
> http://wiki.axiom-developer.org/RosettaStone
> 
> was the result of an early experiment to convert LaTeX to HTML before
> we had support for pamphlets on the wiki. The result of the
> conversion is one really large page which is very slow to load.
> Perhaps we should either do a better job of conversion to HTML
> (multiple pages) or maybe just replace it with the pamphlet version?
> 
> http://wiki.axiom-developer.org/axiom--test--1/src/doc/Rosetta

My preference would be the pamphlet version, for the simple reason that
it is better to have one version that everyone keeps up to date. 
Multiple versions in different places is likely to result in one
becoming "current" and the other one getting progressively older,
unless there is an automatic sync between the two.

> At least that would simplify the online edit issue. I could also
> probably eliminate the ban on links inside pamphlet files since
> spammers are unlikely to go to the trouble of editing LaTeX/noweb
> pages. (There would still be a restriction in the comments section of
> the pamplet page.)
> 
> What do you think?

That sounds good to me.  Thanks Bill!

Cheers,
CY

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com