[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: emacs-Xtra

From: Ted Zlatanov
Subject: Re: emacs-Xtra
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:05:03 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.110005 (No Gnus v0.5) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

On 14 Apr 2006, address@hidden wrote:

>> From: Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden>

>> By the same reasoning the FSF should not publish a two-part ELisp
>> reference manual, because half of it could be online and it's cheaper
>> to publish one book.
> You are driving the arguments to absurd, which doesn't help to resolve
> the issue in a reasonable way.

Sorry if it seems that way, I thought it was a sensible analogy.
Absurd would be "the FSF should not publish anything because it's
cheapest" ;)

> That's the reasoning I got from Richard, and I'll let him restate or
> revise it (in the latter case, I apologize for possible confusion).

Fair enough.  I just wanted to make sure the goal was not mistakenly
set to be one thing (smaller manual) when the FSF really wants to
accomplish another (lower costs).  Obviously RMS and you have
discussed it, and I'll defer to your knowledge of the situation and

> I hope the solution I suggested elsewhere in this thread will be
> accepted as a reasonable compromise.

I have two more suggestions:

- decrease the font size in the published manuals.  ORA books and many
  others use a noticeably smaller font, and are quite readable.

- edit the manual to shorten it, without losing content.

The latter is not too hard.  There are many sentences that could be
shortened or reworded without loss, after a cursory look through the


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]