scrollkeeper-devel — Developer discussion list for ScrollKeeper

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Clarification about language tag

[Christian M. <mar...@fr...>]

>> "DM" == Dan Mueth <mu...@al...> writes:

[...]

[SF seem to filter some doain name like wanaddo.fr, so I can't post to
this list with my current address. Somebody konw where I can complain
about this feature ?]

> On a technical level, it doesn't work because (a) we technically didn't
> translate the categories into 'en', and (b) we don't list 'en' as one of
> the supported locales. (We list the supported locales in
> cl/templates/Makefile.am.)  So, supporting 'en' is about as hard as
> writing the po file for it.

en is the same as C no ? 

About supported locale, if nobody is already working on French
translation, I can do that.

> I always assumed the standard was to use the fallback locale, C, for
> documents in English, and that there wasn't much point in setting one's
> locale to 'en' or setting the locale in an OMF file to 'en'.  Of course
> English is my first language and I'm no expert on locales, so I may be
> missing something.  Is there a reason why we should install English 
> documents under both the C locale and en locale?  Or do some distributions 
> not put english documents in the C locale and instead put them under the 
> en locale?

Read http://bugs.debia.org/144730 for full explanation.

Christian

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Clarification about language tag

[Dan M. <mu...@al...>]

On Sun, 12 May 2002, Christian Marillat wrote:

> >> "CM" == Christian Marillat <mar...@fr...> writes:
> 
> > Hi,
> > Quoting the scrollkeeper documentation :
> 
> > ,----
> > | The standard OMF specifies the "language" element as optional and as
> > | having no attributes. For ScrollKeeper to relate documents with the
> > | locale of the user, the locale of the documents must be specified. This
> > | is done by using a new attribute, "code", of the "language" element. The
> > | language code should be a standard locale.
> > ----
> 
> > But unfortunately, if the language tag is set to "en", scrollkeeper is
> > unable to install that document.
> 
> Somebody can explain why the 'en' language tag doesn't work ?
> 
> Christian

On a technical level, it doesn't work because (a) we technically didn't
translate the categories into 'en', and (b) we don't list 'en' as one of
the supported locales. (We list the supported locales in
cl/templates/Makefile.am.)  So, supporting 'en' is about as hard as
writing the po file for it.

I always assumed the standard was to use the fallback locale, C, for
documents in English, and that there wasn't much point in setting one's
locale to 'en' or setting the locale in an OMF file to 'en'.  Of course
English is my first language and I'm no expert on locales, so I may be
missing something.  Is there a reason why we should install English 
documents under both the C locale and en locale?  Or do some distributions 
not put english documents in the C locale and instead put them under the 
en locale?

-Dan

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Clarification about language tag

[Christian M. <mar...@fr...>]

>> "CM" == Christian Marillat <mar...@fr...> writes:

> Hi,
> Quoting the scrollkeeper documentation :

> ,----
> | The standard OMF specifies the "language" element as optional and as
> | having no attributes. For ScrollKeeper to relate documents with the
> | locale of the user, the locale of the documents must be specified. This
> | is done by using a new attribute, "code", of the "language" element. The
> | language code should be a standard locale.
> ----

> But unfortunately, if the language tag is set to "en", scrollkeeper is
> unable to install that document.

Somebody can explain why the 'en' language tag doesn't work ?

Christian

[Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: omf encoding

[Karl E. <ke...@gm...>]

Dan Mueth <mu...@al...> writes:

> Does anybody happen to know if there is a command-line tool to convert
> files from one encoding to another, and one character set to another?

Use iconv (or recode).
  I
> Similarly, does anybody know of a tool for detecting the encoding and 
> character set of a file?

Emacs tries guessing -- sometimes it fails, though.  AFAIK, you can
only say something like: this is _not_ a UTF-8 files, but positive
statements are not correct for 100% of all cases.

-- 
ke...@su... (work) / ke...@gm... (home):              |
http://www.suse.de/~ke/                                  |      ,__o
Free Translation Project:                                |    _-\_<,
http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/contrib/po/HTML/             |   (*)/'(*)

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] omf encoding

[Dan M. <mu...@al...>]

Does anybody happen to know if there is a command-line tool to convert
files from one encoding to another, and one character set to another?  I
see you can do it with vim, but I figure there must be a command-line tool
somewhere.

Similarly, does anybody know of a tool for detecting the encoding and 
character set of a file?

Dan


On 9 May 2002, John Fleck wrote:

> On Thu, 2002-05-09 at 20:50, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> > On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 06:45:33PM -0600, John Fleck wrote:
> > > Unless the document's encoding is declared otherwise, libxml (and
> > > therefore ScrollKeeper) assumes UTF-8:
> > > 
> > > http://xmlsoft.org/encoding.html
> > > 
> > > "If there is no encoding declaration, then the input has to be in either
> > > UTF-8 or UTF-16, if it is not then at some point when processing the
> > > input, the converter/checker of UTF-8 form will raise an encoding error.
> > > You may end-up with a garbled document, or no document at all !"
> > > 
> > > This means that in the case of OMF files in other encodings (like the
> > > one for ggv that started this discussion) we need to specify the
> > > encoding in the xml declaration.
> > > 
> > > The encodings that seem to be of importance to us:
> > > 
> > >    1. UTF-8 is supported by default (null handlers)
> > >    2. UTF-16, both little and big endian
> > 
> > Where is UTF-16 being used commonly? Asian languages I know about (so
> > they tend to prefer local encodings at the moment), but are there any
> > others.
> > 
> > >    3. ISO-Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) covering most western languages
> > 
> > We'll need to be aware of all iso-8859, not just iso-8869-1, since many
> > European languages need them. For example, Czechs and the Slovaks use
> > 8859-2, a lot of the Scandanavian countries use 8859-6, etc. Unless you
> > add the requirement that everything must be UTF-8, then we just need to
> > be able to do this generally (the Japanese and Chinese translators might
> > like us more, then, too).
> > 
> > And that's all assuming you don't want the Euro symbol, and ... oh ...
> > it's all getting too hard ... I need to go lie down now. :-(
> > 
> 
> Well, unless we're particularly industrious, we're restricted to the
> encodings supported by libxml2, which are the ones I listed above plus a
> couple that didn't seem particularly relevant. The full list*:
> 
>    1. UTF-8 is supported by default (null handlers)
>    2. UTF-16, both little and big endian
>    3. ISO-Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) covering most western languages
>    4. ASCII, useful mostly for saving
>    5. HTML, a specific handler for the conversion of UTF-8 to ASCII with
> HTML predefined entities like © for the Copyright sign.
> 
> * http://www.xmlsoft.org/encoding.html
> 
> Beyond that, we'll have to write our own encoding converters.
> 
> Cheers,
> John
> 

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] #scrollkeeper on irc.openprojects.net

[Gregory L. <gle...@li...>]

On Fri, 2002-05-10 at 08:20, Dan Mueth wrote:
> I don't anticipate using it any time soon.  
> 
> BTW: What does it take to maintain it?

Not much, just leaving that window open in my perpetual xchat session,
and re-registering it with the critter that maintains a list of channels
on irc.openprojects.net.  
	Greg

> On 9 May 2002, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> 
> > Is it worthwhile to keep maintaining this channel?  I just noticed that
> > the chanserv has forgotten about it, and as far as I know, nobody has
> > been there for useful conversation in a few months.

-- 
Portland, Oregon, USA.

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] #scrollkeeper on irc.openprojects.net

[Dan M. <mu...@al...>]

I don't anticipate using it any time soon.  

BTW: What does it take to maintain it?

Dan


On 9 May 2002, Gregory Leblanc wrote:

> Is it worthwhile to keep maintaining this channel?  I just noticed that
> the chanserv has forgotten about it, and as far as I know, nobody has
> been there for useful conversation in a few months.
> 	Greg
> 
> 

[Scrollkeeper-devel] #scrollkeeper on irc.openprojects.net

[Gregory L. <gle...@li...>]

Is it worthwhile to keep maintaining this channel?  I just noticed that
the chanserv has forgotten about it, and as far as I know, nobody has
been there for useful conversation in a few months.
	Greg

-- 
Portland, Oregon, USA.

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] omf encoding

[John F. <jf...@in...>]

On Thu, 2002-05-09 at 20:50, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 06:45:33PM -0600, John Fleck wrote:
> > Unless the document's encoding is declared otherwise, libxml (and
> > therefore ScrollKeeper) assumes UTF-8:
> > 
> > http://xmlsoft.org/encoding.html
> > 
> > "If there is no encoding declaration, then the input has to be in either
> > UTF-8 or UTF-16, if it is not then at some point when processing the
> > input, the converter/checker of UTF-8 form will raise an encoding error.
> > You may end-up with a garbled document, or no document at all !"
> > 
> > This means that in the case of OMF files in other encodings (like the
> > one for ggv that started this discussion) we need to specify the
> > encoding in the xml declaration.
> > 
> > The encodings that seem to be of importance to us:
> > 
> >    1. UTF-8 is supported by default (null handlers)
> >    2. UTF-16, both little and big endian
> 
> Where is UTF-16 being used commonly? Asian languages I know about (so
> they tend to prefer local encodings at the moment), but are there any
> others.
> 
> >    3. ISO-Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) covering most western languages
> 
> We'll need to be aware of all iso-8859, not just iso-8869-1, since many
> European languages need them. For example, Czechs and the Slovaks use
> 8859-2, a lot of the Scandanavian countries use 8859-6, etc. Unless you
> add the requirement that everything must be UTF-8, then we just need to
> be able to do this generally (the Japanese and Chinese translators might
> like us more, then, too).
> 
> And that's all assuming you don't want the Euro symbol, and ... oh ...
> it's all getting too hard ... I need to go lie down now. :-(
> 

Well, unless we're particularly industrious, we're restricted to the
encodings supported by libxml2, which are the ones I listed above plus a
couple that didn't seem particularly relevant. The full list*:

   1. UTF-8 is supported by default (null handlers)
   2. UTF-16, both little and big endian
   3. ISO-Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) covering most western languages
   4. ASCII, useful mostly for saving
   5. HTML, a specific handler for the conversion of UTF-8 to ASCII with
HTML predefined entities like © for the Copyright sign.

* http://www.xmlsoft.org/encoding.html

Beyond that, we'll have to write our own encoding converters.

Cheers,
John
-- 
John Fleck
jf...@in... (h) jf...@ab... (w)
http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com

"You don't want to die with the music still in you."
 - John Gardner

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] omf encoding

[Malcolm T. <ma...@co...>]

On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 06:45:33PM -0600, John Fleck wrote:
> Unless the document's encoding is declared otherwise, libxml (and
> therefore ScrollKeeper) assumes UTF-8:
> 
> http://xmlsoft.org/encoding.html
> 
> "If there is no encoding declaration, then the input has to be in either
> UTF-8 or UTF-16, if it is not then at some point when processing the
> input, the converter/checker of UTF-8 form will raise an encoding error.
> You may end-up with a garbled document, or no document at all !"
> 
> This means that in the case of OMF files in other encodings (like the
> one for ggv that started this discussion) we need to specify the
> encoding in the xml declaration.
> 
> The encodings that seem to be of importance to us:
> 
>    1. UTF-8 is supported by default (null handlers)
>    2. UTF-16, both little and big endian

Where is UTF-16 being used commonly? Asian languages I know about (so
they tend to prefer local encodings at the moment), but are there any
others.

>    3. ISO-Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) covering most western languages

We'll need to be aware of all iso-8859, not just iso-8869-1, since many
European languages need them. For example, Czechs and the Slovaks use
8859-2, a lot of the Scandanavian countries use 8859-6, etc. Unless you
add the requirement that everything must be UTF-8, then we just need to
be able to do this generally (the Japanese and Chinese translators might
like us more, then, too).

And that's all assuming you don't want the Euro symbol, and ... oh ...
it's all getting too hard ... I need to go lie down now. :-(

Malcolm

-- 

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] omf encoding

[John F. <jf...@in...>]

On Thu, 2002-05-09 at 07:09, John Fleck wrote:
> Folks -
> 
> What are the encoding requirements for an omf file?
> 
> I'm getting the following error:
> 
>  ggv-ja.omf:5: error: Input is not proper UTF-8, indicate encoding !
> 
> It appears I can solve this by adding an encoding="ISO-8859-1" to the
> xml declaration, but I wanted to be sure I'm doing this right.
> 

Thanks for that very good question, John!

Unless the document's encoding is declared otherwise, libxml (and
therefore ScrollKeeper) assumes UTF-8:

http://xmlsoft.org/encoding.html

"If there is no encoding declaration, then the input has to be in either
UTF-8 or UTF-16, if it is not then at some point when processing the
input, the converter/checker of UTF-8 form will raise an encoding error.
You may end-up with a garbled document, or no document at all !"

This means that in the case of OMF files in other encodings (like the
one for ggv that started this discussion) we need to specify the
encoding in the xml declaration.

The encodings that seem to be of importance to us:

   1. UTF-8 is supported by default (null handlers)
   2. UTF-16, both little and big endian
   3. ISO-Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) covering most western languages

Cheers,
John
-- 
John Fleck
jf...@in... (h) jf...@ab... (w)
http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com

"You don't want to die with the music still in you."
 - John Gardner

[Scrollkeeper-devel] omf encoding

[John F. <jf...@in...>]

Folks -

What are the encoding requirements for an omf file?

I'm getting the following error:

 ggv-ja.omf:5: error: Input is not proper UTF-8, indicate encoding !

It appears I can solve this by adding an encoding="ISO-8859-1" to the
xml declaration, but I wanted to be sure I'm doing this right.

Cheers,
John
-- 
John Fleck
jf...@in... (h) jf...@ab... (w)
http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com

"You don't want to die with the music still in you."
 - John Gardner

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Dan M. <mu...@al...>]

On Sun, 5 May 2002, Greg Ferguson wrote:

> I've been looking all over the sk site(s) and still have yet to figure
> out what the differences are. Where is this documented, and are there
> pointers to examples?

Several children became attributes.  In particular, the children of
<subject>, <rights>, and <version> became attributes.  The new form is
shown at:

http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files/ar01s06.html

The old form looked the same except the attributes of these 3 tags were
children.

-Dan

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Dan M. <mu...@al...>]

On Sun, 5 May 2002, Dan Mueth wrote:

> 
> On 5 May 2002, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> 
> > I have checked out all of the above and they are equivalent as far as I
> > can tell to the older versions of the webpage, for eg it shows <version>
> > as being multiple indented tags instead of being one tag as in the
> > webpage. This is so for both the example from the sk site and the gnome
> > cvs copy.
> 
> Doh!  I think I'm having one of those Homer Simpson moments.  Yeah - I
> also haven't updated scrollkeeper-example2 yet.  Well, the
> scrollkeeper-example2 build files and documentation should be fine.  It is
> just the OMF file which needs to be updated.
> 
> I should have these packages updated shortly.

Everything should be up-to-date now.  Tell me if you find any more 
problems.

Dan

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Dan M. <mu...@al...>]

On 5 May 2002, Chris Lyttle wrote:

> I have checked out all of the above and they are equivalent as far as I
> can tell to the older versions of the webpage, for eg it shows <version>
> as being multiple indented tags instead of being one tag as in the
> webpage. This is so for both the example from the sk site and the gnome
> cvs copy.

Doh!  I think I'm having one of those Homer Simpson moments.  Yeah - I
also haven't updated scrollkeeper-example2 yet.  Well, the
scrollkeeper-example2 build files and documentation should be fine.  It is
just the OMF file which needs to be updated.

I should have these packages updated shortly.

Dan

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Chris L. <ch...@wi...>]

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 17:16, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 14:59, John Fleck wrote:
> > 
> > OK, it looks as though the "writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files.xml in
> > ScrollKeeper cvs is more up-to-date than the version on the web site at
> > the URL above.
> > 
> > The "minimal OMF file" and "complete OMF file" examples in the cvs
> > version of the doc validate, with the exception of the "id" attribute of
> > the "version" tag, which should be "identifier". I'll file a bug, and
> > perhaps when Dan surfaces he can do whatever magic is necessary to get
> > the web site version of the doc updated.
> > 
> 
> Thanks for that John, it looks like your omftransform.xsl works to
> transform from the old format to the new. There is one bug, however, it
> doesn't transfer the following;
> 
>    <rights>
>     <type>
>       GNU FDL
>     </type>
>     <license version="1.1">
>       http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html
>     </license>
>     <holder>
>       Rosanna Yuen
>     </holder>
>    </rights>
> 
> properly to;
> 
> <rights type="GNU FDL" license.version="" holder="Rosanna Yuen"/>
> 
> 
> in other words the license.version info is dropped
> Now to get the build working...
> 
> Chris

John,
I just noticed another bug, the following is not being transformed;

<?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>

in the old OMF file is being changed to;

<?xml version="1.0"?>

Chris

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Chris L. <ch...@wi...>]

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 17:25, Dan Mueth wrote:
> 
> It looks like I forgot to update the web page after the release.  I fixed 
> the mistake John found and uploaded the HTML form of the doc to the web 
> page.  Now the doc should be completely up-to-date:
> 
> http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files/index.html
> 
Thats great, thanks Dan...

> 
> For general information on setting up a package to play nicely with 
> ScrollKeeper (ie. build and install its docs and OMF files), see the 
> scrollkeeper-example2 package:
> 
> https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=11543&release_id=80136
> 
> The accompanying manual which explains how the example package works is 
> also available online as HTML:
> 
> http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/scrollkeeper_example2_manual/index.html
> 
> For GNOME folks, we have a modified version of the scrollkeeper-example2 
> package and document which simplifies things a bit further, assuming a 
> standard GNOME setup.  We still need to propagate the OMF file updates to 
> this package, but the rest of it is up-to-date.  It can be obtained from 
> GNOME CVS at gnome-docu/gdp/gdp-example2.  
> 


I have checked out all of the above and they are equivalent as far as I
can tell to the older versions of the webpage, for eg it shows <version>
as being multiple indented tags instead of being one tag as in the
webpage. This is so for both the example from the sk site and the gnome
cvs copy.

Thanks for all your work on this Dan

Chris

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Dan M. <mu...@al...>]

It looks like I forgot to update the web page after the release.  I fixed 
the mistake John found and uploaded the HTML form of the doc to the web 
page.  Now the doc should be completely up-to-date:

http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files/index.html

That is the authoritative document for writing ScrollKeeper/OMF files.

For general information on setting up a package to play nicely with 
ScrollKeeper (ie. build and install its docs and OMF files), see the 
scrollkeeper-example2 package:

https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=11543&release_id=80136

The accompanying manual which explains how the example package works is 
also available online as HTML:

http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/scrollkeeper_example2_manual/index.html

For GNOME folks, we have a modified version of the scrollkeeper-example2 
package and document which simplifies things a bit further, assuming a 
standard GNOME setup.  We still need to propagate the OMF file updates to 
this package, but the rest of it is up-to-date.  It can be obtained from 
GNOME CVS at gnome-docu/gdp/gdp-example2.  

And finally, the list of categories of the contents listing can be found 
at:

http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation.shtml

I think this documentation together covers everything most people need to 
care about, except folks hacking on ScrollKeeper or a help browser.

Dan



On 5 May 2002, John Fleck wrote:

> On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 14:52, John Fleck wrote:
> > On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 16:19, David Merrill wrote:.
> > > > 
> > > > I've been looking all over the sk site(s) and still have yet to figure
> > > > out what the differences are. Where is this documented, and are there
> > > > pointers to examples?
> > > 
> > > http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files/
> > > 
> > > and there is an example in that same document. I'm just working
> > > through it myself. If you have time, do you want to take over this
> > > issue though? I'm rather harried and being pulled in too many
> > > directions.
> > > 
> > 
> > Unfortunately, the web page David points to above is out of date. Dan
> > hasn't updated the documentation yet to match the DTD, so the only place
> > the new format is documented in the DTD itself, I believe. It's in the
> > tarball at extract/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd.
> > 
> > I think Dan's swamped and needs help with stuff like this. If no one
> > else does soon, I'm planning on jumping in and rewriting that
> > documentation, as we need this for the upcoming GNOME release. I'll also
> > take a look at db2omf and see if it's within my modest skills to change
> > that as well.
> > 
> 
> OK, it looks as though the "writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files.xml in
> ScrollKeeper cvs is more up-to-date than the version on the web site at
> the URL above.
> 
> The "minimal OMF file" and "complete OMF file" examples in the cvs
> version of the doc validate, with the exception of the "id" attribute of
> the "version" tag, which should be "identifier". I'll file a bug, and
> perhaps when Dan surfaces he can do whatever magic is necessary to get
> the web site version of the doc updated.
> 
> Cheers,
> John
> 

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Chris L. <ch...@wi...>]

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 14:59, John Fleck wrote:
> 
> OK, it looks as though the "writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files.xml in
> ScrollKeeper cvs is more up-to-date than the version on the web site at
> the URL above.
> 
> The "minimal OMF file" and "complete OMF file" examples in the cvs
> version of the doc validate, with the exception of the "id" attribute of
> the "version" tag, which should be "identifier". I'll file a bug, and
> perhaps when Dan surfaces he can do whatever magic is necessary to get
> the web site version of the doc updated.
> 

Thanks for that John, it looks like your omftransform.xsl works to
transform from the old format to the new. There is one bug, however, it
doesn't transfer the following;

   <rights>
    <type>
      GNU FDL
    </type>
    <license version="1.1">
      http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html
    </license>
    <holder>
      Rosanna Yuen
    </holder>
   </rights>

properly to;

<rights type="GNU FDL" license.version="" holder="Rosanna Yuen"/>


in other words the license.version info is dropped
Now to get the build working...

Chris

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[John F. <jf...@in...>]

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 14:52, John Fleck wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 16:19, David Merrill wrote:.
> > > 
> > > I've been looking all over the sk site(s) and still have yet to figure
> > > out what the differences are. Where is this documented, and are there
> > > pointers to examples?
> > 
> > http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files/
> > 
> > and there is an example in that same document. I'm just working
> > through it myself. If you have time, do you want to take over this
> > issue though? I'm rather harried and being pulled in too many
> > directions.
> > 
> 
> Unfortunately, the web page David points to above is out of date. Dan
> hasn't updated the documentation yet to match the DTD, so the only place
> the new format is documented in the DTD itself, I believe. It's in the
> tarball at extract/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd.
> 
> I think Dan's swamped and needs help with stuff like this. If no one
> else does soon, I'm planning on jumping in and rewriting that
> documentation, as we need this for the upcoming GNOME release. I'll also
> take a look at db2omf and see if it's within my modest skills to change
> that as well.
> 

OK, it looks as though the "writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files.xml in
ScrollKeeper cvs is more up-to-date than the version on the web site at
the URL above.

The "minimal OMF file" and "complete OMF file" examples in the cvs
version of the doc validate, with the exception of the "id" attribute of
the "version" tag, which should be "identifier". I'll file a bug, and
perhaps when Dan surfaces he can do whatever magic is necessary to get
the web site version of the doc updated.

Cheers,
John
-- 
John Fleck
jf...@in... (h) jf...@ab... (w)
http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com

"You don't want to die with the music still in you."
 - John Gardner

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[John F. <jf...@in...>]

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 16:19, David Merrill wrote:.
> > 
> > I've been looking all over the sk site(s) and still have yet to figure
> > out what the differences are. Where is this documented, and are there
> > pointers to examples?
> 
> http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files/
> 
> and there is an example in that same document. I'm just working
> through it myself. If you have time, do you want to take over this
> issue though? I'm rather harried and being pulled in too many
> directions.
> 

Unfortunately, the web page David points to above is out of date. Dan
hasn't updated the documentation yet to match the DTD, so the only place
the new format is documented in the DTD itself, I believe. It's in the
tarball at extract/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd.

I think Dan's swamped and needs help with stuff like this. If no one
else does soon, I'm planning on jumping in and rewriting that
documentation, as we need this for the upcoming GNOME release. I'll also
take a look at db2omf and see if it's within my modest skills to change
that as well.

Cheers,
John
 
-- 
John Fleck
jf...@in... (h) jf...@ab... (w)
http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com

"You don't want to die with the music still in you."
 - John Gardner

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[David M. <da...@lu...>]

On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 05:05:13PM -0400, Greg Ferguson wrote:
> On May 5,  2:05pm, David Merrill wrote:
> > Subject: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files
> > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 06:56:43AM -0600, John Fleck wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 07:18, David Merrill wrote:
> > > > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 03:06:10AM -0700, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> > > > > John,
> > > > > I went thru this evening and updated the gnome-games omf files to
> be in
> > > > > the same format as the document you mentioned below (in the
> writing omf
> > > > > files doc).
> > > >
> > > > We have a utility called db2omf that extracts omf data from docbook
> > > > files. I don't know if you already have seen it and decided it
> wasn't
> > > > useful for you or didn't meet your needs, but just in case I thought
> I
> > > > would mention it. It might alleviate the drudge work of maintaining
> > > > your omf files manually.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Cool. I forgot about that. Has it been updated to reflect the changed
> > > omf file format in 0.3.8?
> >
> > I don't think so, no. But it shouldn't be too hard to do that. It is
> > really a simple program.
> 
> I've been looking all over the sk site(s) and still have yet to figure
> out what the differences are. Where is this documented, and are there
> pointers to examples?

http://scrollkeeper.sourceforge.net/documentation/writing_scrollkeeper_omf_files/

and there is an example in that same document. I'm just working
through it myself. If you have time, do you want to take over this
issue though? I'm rather harried and being pulled in too many
directions.

-- 
David C. Merrill                         http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project                   da...@lu...
Lead Developer                                 http://www.tldp.org

Under the full moon light we dance
Spirits dance, we dance
Joining hands, we dance
Joining souls rejoice!
		-- Karen Beth

Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Greg F. <gf...@ho...>]

On May 5,  2:05pm, David Merrill wrote:
> Subject: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files
> On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 06:56:43AM -0600, John Fleck wrote:
> > On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 07:18, David Merrill wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 03:06:10AM -0700, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> > > > John,
> > > > I went thru this evening and updated the gnome-games omf files to
be in
> > > > the same format as the document you mentioned below (in the
writing omf
> > > > files doc).
> > >
> > > We have a utility called db2omf that extracts omf data from docbook
> > > files. I don't know if you already have seen it and decided it
wasn't
> > > useful for you or didn't meet your needs, but just in case I thought
I
> > > would mention it. It might alleviate the drudge work of maintaining
> > > your omf files manually.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Cool. I forgot about that. Has it been updated to reflect the changed
> > omf file format in 0.3.8?
>
> I don't think so, no. But it shouldn't be too hard to do that. It is
> really a simple program.

I've been looking all over the sk site(s) and still have yet to figure
out what the differences are. Where is this documented, and are there
pointers to examples?

thanks...

-- 
Greg Ferguson    * SGI principal engr / LDP contributor
SGI Tech Pubs    * http://techpubs.sgi.com/ | gferg(at)sgi.com
Linux Doc Project* http://www.linuxdoc.org/ | gferg(at)metalab.unc.edu

[Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[Chris L. <ch...@wi...>]

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 12:05, David Merrill wrote:
> On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 06:56:43AM -0600, John Fleck wrote:
> > On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 07:18, David Merrill wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 03:06:10AM -0700, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> > > > John,
> > > > I went thru this evening and updated the gnome-games omf files to be in
> > > > the same format as the document you mentioned below (in the writing omf
> > > > files doc).
> > > 
> > > We have a utility called db2omf that extracts omf data from docbook
> > > files. I don't know if you already have seen it and decided it wasn't
> > > useful for you or didn't meet your needs, but just in case I thought I
> > > would mention it. It might alleviate the drudge work of maintaining
> > > your omf files manually.
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > Cool. I forgot about that. Has it been updated to reflect the changed
> > omf file format in 0.3.8?
> 
> I don't think so, no. But it shouldn't be too hard to do that. It is
> really a simple program.
> 
> > Remind me where I get it.
> 
> It is in the LDP cvs. I am just putting our utilities up for download.
> Check the "Downloads" link on our home page and it should be there
> today. I'm going to go tar it up and post it right now. But I have to
> also write a man page and other stuff like that to make it properly
> packagable.
> 
> I won't do the update to the new format. I'm just swamped with work.
> But if you do update it, please send me the revised version so I can
> diff it and update our version.
> 

Thanks David, I didnt know about it but I will try it out.

Chris

[Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: converting omf files

[David M. <da...@lu...>]

On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 06:56:43AM -0600, John Fleck wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 07:18, David Merrill wrote:
> > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 03:06:10AM -0700, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> > > John,
> > > I went thru this evening and updated the gnome-games omf files to be in
> > > the same format as the document you mentioned below (in the writing omf
> > > files doc).
> > 
> > We have a utility called db2omf that extracts omf data from docbook
> > files. I don't know if you already have seen it and decided it wasn't
> > useful for you or didn't meet your needs, but just in case I thought I
> > would mention it. It might alleviate the drudge work of maintaining
> > your omf files manually.
> > 
> 
> 
> Cool. I forgot about that. Has it been updated to reflect the changed
> omf file format in 0.3.8?

I don't think so, no. But it shouldn't be too hard to do that. It is
really a simple program.

> Remind me where I get it.

It is in the LDP cvs. I am just putting our utilities up for download.
Check the "Downloads" link on our home page and it should be there
today. I'm going to go tar it up and post it right now. But I have to
also write a man page and other stuff like that to make it properly
packagable.

I won't do the update to the new format. I'm just swamped with work.
But if you do update it, please send me the revised version so I can
diff it and update our version.

Thanks,

-- 
David C. Merrill                         http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project                   da...@lu...
Lead Developer                                 http://www.tldp.org

Let there be beauty and strength,
Power and compassion,
Honor and humility,
Mirth and reverence within you.
		-- from The Charge of the Goddess, Doreen Valiente