Hi
I would like to have our guides like the Installation one in PDF format. Is there any quick way to get them?
Rahul
O/H Rahul Sundaram έγραψε:
I would like to have our guides like the Installation one in PDF format. Is there any quick way to get them?
You can quickly convert any HTML page to PDF using the `htmldoc` package. First build the doc using `make html-nochunks` and then pass it through the program.
It's in Extras.
-d
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 12:57 +0000, Dimitris Glezos wrote:
O/H Rahul Sundaram έγραψε:
I would like to have our guides like the Installation one in PDF format. Is there any quick way to get them?
You can quickly convert any HTML page to PDF using the `htmldoc` package. First build the doc using `make html-nochunks` and then pass it through the program.
It's in Extras.
If anyone wants to submit a patch to our toolchain to make this an option for 'make pdf', please do so.
It's ugly but it's better than broken.
Any objection to putting up PDF versions of our HTMl docs built using htmldoc, even though they are ugly?
Other thoughts?
- Karsten, in a "perfect is the enemy of good enough"-mood
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 07:30 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 12:57 +0000, Dimitris Glezos wrote:
O/H Rahul Sundaram έγραψε:
I would like to have our guides like the Installation one in PDF format. Is there any quick way to get them?
You can quickly convert any HTML page to PDF using the `htmldoc` package. First build the doc using `make html-nochunks` and then pass it through the program.
It's in Extras.
If anyone wants to submit a patch to our toolchain to make this an option for 'make pdf', please do so.
It's ugly but it's better than broken.
Any objection to putting up PDF versions of our HTMl docs built using htmldoc, even though they are ugly?
Other thoughts?
- Karsten, in a "perfect is the enemy of good enough"-mood
I think you mean, "Perfect is the enemy of pretty ugly but what else have we got?" :-D
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 10:41 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
I think you mean, "Perfect is the enemy of pretty ugly but what else have we got?" :-D
Careful with the clever quotes, I like "I'm in ur docs correctin ur speling" as the tag-lie quote on #fedora-docs /topic. I don't want to replace it too soon, just when that joke is thoroughly stale.
- Karsten
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 07:50 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 10:41 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
I think you mean, "Perfect is the enemy of pretty ugly but what else have we got?" :-D
Careful with the clever quotes, I like "I'm in ur docs correctin ur speling" as the tag-lie quote on #fedora-docs /topic. I don't want to replace it too soon, just when that joke is thoroughly stale.
Reports of my cleverness have been greatly exaggerated.
Karsten Wade wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 12:57 +0000, Dimitris Glezos wrote:
O/H Rahul Sundaram έγραψε:
I would like to have our guides like the Installation one in PDF format. Is there any quick way to get them?
You can quickly convert any HTML page to PDF using the `htmldoc` package. First build the doc using `make html-nochunks` and then pass it through the program.
It's in Extras.
If anyone wants to submit a patch to our toolchain to make this an option for 'make pdf', please do so.
It's ugly but it's better than broken.
Any objection to putting up PDF versions of our HTMl docs built using htmldoc, even though they are ugly?
Other thoughts?
Yes. Please do this. People have been bugging me to get a redistributable PDF for a while now.
Rahul
FDP Team: PDF creation is a great idea.
I brought it up in the past, and, until we get it automated in the toolchain, I'm glad to produce PDFs via cups-PDF and upload them and link them to the page.
By simply changing settings using "File > Page Setup" in Firefox, you can produce pretty clean PDFs.
Also, using explicit link references in a wiki page also makes it easier. (I need to change a few pages I worked on to follow this existing guideline).
This method, although off-line, is clean and simple.
I also created single-page views and encourage it to be adopted as a standard for multi-page docs in the wiki.
This makes the PDF creation very straightforward.
John Babich Volunteer, Fedora Project
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 20:46 +0300, John Babich wrote:
FDP Team: PDF creation is a great idea.
I brought it up in the past, and, until we get it automated in the toolchain, I'm glad to produce PDFs via cups-PDF and upload them and link them to the page.
Can you post or email me (so I can post) a version of the FC6 Installation Guide done using this method?
Here is the one I built this morning using htmldoc, as per Dimitris suggestion:
http://people.redhat.com/kwade/fedora/fedora-install-guide-en_US.pdf
I'd like to compare the quality of the two. I put up the no-chunks HTML that I used, in case you don't have a build environment handy. :)
http://people.redhat.com/kwade/fedora/fedora-install-guide-en_US.html
By simply changing settings using "File > Page Setup" in Firefox, you can produce pretty clean PDFs.
Also, using explicit link references in a wiki page also makes it easier. (I need to change a few pages I worked on to follow this existing guideline).
This method, although off-line, is clean and simple.
I also created single-page views and encourage it to be adopted as a standard for multi-page docs in the wiki.
This makes the PDF creation very straightforward.
Right, this is a good idea for Wiki-sourced content. However, I think we still want to move documents from Docs/Drafts => XML, rather than having them at Docs. I got an email this morning from someone pointing out that not letting people edit or make comments on a document in Docs defeats the purpose of having it in a Wiki. I agree, and want to get our formally published documents out of the Wiki. :)
- Karsten
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 11:09 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 20:46 +0300, John Babich wrote:
FDP Team: PDF creation is a great idea.
I brought it up in the past, and, until we get it automated in the toolchain, I'm glad to produce PDFs via cups-PDF and upload them and link them to the page.
Can you post or email me (so I can post) a version of the FC6 Installation Guide done using this method?
Here is the one I built this morning using htmldoc, as per Dimitris suggestion:
http://people.redhat.com/kwade/fedora/fedora-install-guide-en_US.pdf
Ouch, and I see misplaced graphics overwriting text, et al.... :-P
O/H Karsten Wade έγραψε:
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 20:46 +0300, John Babich wrote:
FDP Team: PDF creation is a great idea.
I brought it up in the past, and, until we get it automated in the toolchain, I'm glad to produce PDFs via cups-PDF and upload them and link them to the page.
Can you post or email me (so I can post) a version of the FC6 Installation Guide done using this method?
I mentioned `htmldoc` many months ago on the IRC but maybe everyone was drunk back then and didn't pay attention. Darn, I *really* should start writing everything (ideas, tasks) down for future reference... :/
I've updated our wiki page about the PDF creation together with some TODOs. Anyone wants to help out with those?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Tools/PDFconversion
Attached on the page you can find a PDF I created and instructions/info about the use of `htmldoc`. Here's a quick link [1].
[1]:http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Tools/PDFconversion?action=AttachF...
The cool thing with this is that we can add many 'no-chunks' files to naivly create a big Guide.
I think we still want to move documents from Docs/Drafts => XML, rather than having them at Docs. I got an email this morning from someone pointing out that not letting people edit or make comments on a document in Docs defeats the purpose of having it in a Wiki. I agree, and want to get our formally published documents out of the Wiki. :)
I think we should really try to find a way not only to create our docs online but to also *maintain* them. "Wiki -> XML" is indeed great, but unless we get it as much automated as possible, the overhead is a nightmare.
-d
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 14:14 +0000, Dimitris Glezos wrote:
I think we should really try to find a way not only to create our docs online but to also *maintain* them. "Wiki -> XML" is indeed great, but unless we get it as much automated as possible, the overhead is a nightmare.
One concern is that we are creating two classes of document -- static formal publications and appears-to-be-dynamic because it is published at wiki/Docs.
The overhead to produce and maintain the static content is considerable, compared to the Wiki. However, the Wiki is trapping -- it makes you comfortable with its workings, your content gets trapped there in a way that is increasingly difficult to extract, it's nearly impossible to localize with Fedora L10n tools, etc.
This is why, despite the pain, I've been driving us toward a "Wiki as $EDITOR" approach. Unfortunately, doing this requires more resources doing Web app programming, and that is not a big skill in this project. So, our project is vying for resources in Infrastructure and Websites.
We could choose to go backward/sideways from here and make it all Wiki. Or ...
Well, the point is, it is always open for discussion what we can and should do.
- Karsten
On 3/1/07, Karsten Wade kwade@redhat.com wrote:
Here is the one I built this morning using htmldoc, as per Dimitris suggestion:
http://people.redhat.com/kwade/fedora/fedora-install-guide-en_US.pdf
I'd like to compare the quality of the two. I put up the no-chunks HTML that I used, in case you don't have a build environment handy. :)
http://people.redhat.com/kwade/fedora/fedora-install-guide-en_US.html
I uploaded a quick PDF I created with no attempt to beautify it. I took your no-chunks HTML and just printed it using cups-PDF. I didn't see any graphics in your web page, except for admonitions icons, so you won't see any in the doc.
The links for the PDF files are:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JohnBabich?action=AttachFile&do=get&ta...
Another example is the Desktop User Guide, complete with screenshots, at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JohnBabich?action=AttachFile&do=get&ta...
This was produced from this link:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/DesktopUserGuide/Print
using File > Print (using printer CUPS/cups-PDF).
The output is even cleaner if you select
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/DesktopUserGuide/Print?action=print
which is the same as "Print View" under "More Actions" on the wiki page.
Let me know what you think of these samples.
John Babich Volunteer, Fedora Docs Project
O/H John Babich έγραψε:
On 3/1/07, Karsten Wade kwade@redhat.com wrote:
Here is the one I built this morning using htmldoc, as per Dimitris suggestion:
I uploaded a quick PDF I created with no attempt to beautify it. I took your no-chunks HTML and just printed it using cups-PDF. I didn't see any graphics in your web page, except for admonitions icons, so you won't see any in the doc.
So we now have two ways to create PDFs. One is `htmldoc` and the other is `cups-PDF`.
Although none of them at the time is integrated into our toolchain, they are not bad at all to manually create some PDFs and upload them to fedora.redhat.com/docs/.
I prefer the second way for three reasons: It works, it gives us with no extra work a high-quality PDF and CSS is effective there, so we can control the output pretty well before getting the PDF.
I'll investigate producing PDFs from `make html-nochunks` and see whether the CSS property `page-break-before:` works and try to make it more usable a bit.
Does anyone know whether we can use it from the command-line?
-d
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 13:25 +0000, Dimitris Glezos wrote:
O/H John Babich έγραψε:
On 3/1/07, Karsten Wade kwade@redhat.com wrote:
Here is the one I built this morning using htmldoc, as per Dimitris suggestion:
I uploaded a quick PDF I created with no attempt to beautify it. I took your no-chunks HTML and just printed it using cups-PDF. I didn't see any graphics in your web page, except for admonitions icons, so you won't see any in the doc.
So we now have two ways to create PDFs. One is `htmldoc` and the other is `cups-PDF`.
There are others that are less hacky that I haven't seen yet on the list -- for example, XSLT to convert DocBook to RML and then using ReportLab (python-reportlab package) to convert to PDF. The results are much cleaner, and still allow very customizable styling. To do this properly, someone would have to actually write the XSLT in question, which is probably not a simple task of a few hours.
I am a bit dismayed at the fact that there seem to be gazillions of ways to produce PDFs, but no one has invested time in getting DocBook to use them. Apparently "laziness" trumps "hubris" in this case.¹ I'd bet this project warrants a GSoC pitch, since it would benefit pretty much the entire FOSS community and not just Fedora.
= = = ¹ e.g. http://www.netropolis.org/hash/perl/virtue.html
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 09:48 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
I am a bit dismayed at the fact that there seem to be gazillions of ways to produce PDFs, but no one has invested time in getting DocBook to use them. Apparently "laziness" trumps "hubris" in this case.¹ I'd bet this project warrants a GSoC pitch, since it would benefit pretty much the entire FOSS community and not just Fedora.
+1
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraBounties#DocBook2PDF
I've received two contacts regarding our man page bounty on there for GSoC and similar SoC projects. Seems like a good idea to put our request out front.
/me files separate thought on getting some early exposure value by hyping Fedora GSoC-worthy projects *immediately*
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 20:46 +0300, John Babich wrote:
FDP Team: PDF creation is a great idea.
I brought it up in the past, and, until we get it automated in the toolchain, I'm glad to produce PDFs via cups-PDF and upload them and link them to the page.
By simply changing settings using "File > Page Setup" in Firefox, you can produce pretty clean PDFs.
Also, using explicit link references in a wiki page also makes it easier. (I need to change a few pages I worked on to follow this existing guideline).
This method, although off-line, is clean and simple.
I also created single-page views and encourage it to be adopted as a standard for multi-page docs in the wiki.
This makes the PDF creation very straightforward.
This might be preferable to the htmldoc method, which is automatable but *extremely* ugly. Lots of intrusive hi-ASCII characters in headings, for one thing. If anyone can help fix that, great.
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 14:10 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
This might be preferable to the htmldoc method, which is automatable but *extremely* ugly. Lots of intrusive hi-ASCII characters in headings, for one thing. If anyone can help fix that, great.
The method John used might also be automated, if there is a CLI for cups-PDF. Alternately, maybe a nice Dogtail script. It can't be part of the Makefile, but could be at least be easier to do.
All stop-gap, of course. I expect great things from the Java kids for F7. Right?
- Karsten, who needs to find out the latest on the Java dependencies
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 11:20 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 14:10 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
This might be preferable to the htmldoc method, which is automatable but *extremely* ugly. Lots of intrusive hi-ASCII characters in headings, for one thing. If anyone can help fix that, great.
The method John used might also be automated, if there is a CLI for cups-PDF. Alternately, maybe a nice Dogtail script. It can't be part of the Makefile, but could be at least be easier to do.
Did somebody say Dogtail? :-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Some shots of myself in the OLPC press conference
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/NicolasCorrarello/OLPC27022007
-
Dimitris Glezos -
John Babich -
Karsten Wade -
Nicolas A. Corrarello -
Paul W. Frields -
Rahul Sundaram