From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2004-03-22 16:32:34
|
Hi all, Some more thoughts about the PDFs that Darcy can produce with Ventura: - Ideally, we should have all our sources, configuration files, etc., in CVS and work with free and/or open source tools. But of course we shouldn't be dogmatic about this. If Darcy can produce great-looking PDFs with Ventura we would be daft to use our own, which at the moment look poor *and* are broken. Still, the long-term goal IMO must remain that anybody who checks out the manual module can build all the targets (including PDF) without having to buy proprietary software. But I don't see this happen very soon. In the meantime, if Darcy uses any intermediate files, import definition files, style maps or so (I have no idea how this works!), it would be good to add these to the module. This way other Ventura users could build the docs too. And what's more: everybody could look at them, discuss them, suggest and test enhancements etc... which is one of the most powerful assets of open source development. Also, if Darcy ever leaves us, or has little time, we'll still be able to build on his contributions. - About style and logos: if this thing works out, the "Darcy docs" will be an important part of the Firebird face as others see it. Use of another logo, especially if it features prominently on the cover page of the docs, should therefore be widely discussed within the community (project members, project admins, webmaster, FFmembers list...). This is not something that should be decided by a handful of people in firebird-docs. Maybe it's better to concentrate on the technical aspects for now (see other post) and keep the current logo on the cover. We can always talk about new logos later. And of course anybody can develop new logos if he wants to, not just Darcy. But to make it the new official Firebird logo is another thing. - <shameless plug> Talking about the FFmembers list: this is the discussion list of the Firebird Foundation. The Foundation supports the Firebird Project in a number of ways, both financially (grants to active developers) and non-financially (making noise in public places). You can become an Associate Member for as little as $50/yr; a full membership costs $300/yr. All members can take part in the discussions on the FFmembers list, but only full members have voting rights. Look at http://www.firebirdsql.org/ff/foundation/ if you want to know more. </shameless plug> Greetings, Paul Vinkenoog |
From: Darcy O'N. <ds...@sk...> - 2004-03-22 17:36:56
|
Here's the information I can fill in on this topic: >Hi all, > >- But of course we > shouldn't be dogmatic about this. If Darcy can produce great-looking > PDFs with Ventura we would be daft to use our own, which at the > moment look poor *and* are broken. > > The Ventura approach is just an added approach to producing documents in the best available formats. Once the system works and PDF's can be created properly with Open Source software then they can co-exist without any issues. The benefit of a desktop publishing application is only that it provides better page layout and graphic handling and a more 'professional' look.. > In the meantime, if Darcy uses any intermediate files, import > definition files, style maps or so (I have no idea how this works!), > > Ventura produces a style sheet which can be exported to CSS which will maintain the format, or as in this case I use different font's that are not 'open' but if someone wanted to change the fonts in the CSS file it would be a simple procedure. As for the Ventura XML Import function, it basically maps an XML tag to the Ventura style sheet. This is a text file so keeping it in CVS is no problem. For those who would like to view the XML map it can be found here: http://firebird.methyl.ca/fb-xml-map.vmf >- About style and logos: if this thing works out, the "Darcy docs" > will be an important part of the Firebird face as others see it. > Use of another logo, especially if it features prominently on the > cover page of the docs, should therefore be widely discussed within > the community (project members, project admins, webmaster, FFmembers > list...). This is not something that should be decided by a handful > of people in firebird-docs. > > As this part of the doc project develops this will be increasingly important. As we all know a 'strong image' is important but the key is to be consistently different than the other projects. > Maybe it's better to concentrate on the technical aspects for now > (see other post) and keep the current logo on the cover. We can > always talk about new logos later. And of course anybody can develop > new logos if he wants to, not just Darcy. But to make it the new > official Firebird logo is another thing. > > Right now I think working out the technical details is the best direction. From what I'm seeing right now it shouldn't be a problem. The 'style' of the future Firebird docs is something we will all need to discuss but it would be easier if I could just make a change, publish the doc correctly and then collect opinions. Repeat until finished and 80% of the group is happy. > Look at http://www.firebirdsql.org/ff/foundation/ if you want to > know more. > I'm looking into this and in all likelihood will be joining shortly. Darcy O'Neil |
From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2004-03-24 14:53:44
|
Hi Darcy, > Right now I think working out the technical details is the best > direction. From what I'm seeing right now it shouldn't be a > problem. The 'style' of the future Firebird docs is something we > will all need to discuss but it would be easier if I could just make > a change, publish the doc correctly and then collect opinions. > Repeat until finished and 80% of the group is happy. I agree. We just have to realize that when it comes to logos - especially on the cover of our docs - the opinions should not only be collected from firebird-docs, but from the entire Firebird community (well, at least the active members/contributors). Greetings, Paul Vinkenoog |