[tex-live] Bug in syntax package
dak at gnu.org
Thu Sep 7 15:48:03 CEST 2006
"John R. Culleton" <john at wexfordpress.com> writes:
> On Wednesday 06 September 2006 19:00, David Kastrup wrote:
>> karl at freefriends.org (Karl Berry) writes:
>> > When I wrote, "I have no idea where this version of
>> > syntax.sty comes from" I meant, "because it's not the one
>> > from CTAN".
>> > I have no idea either, but I have just updated the version in TL
>> > from CTAN. Thanks much for pointing this out. Er, deleted all
>> > the dvi files too. Well, maybe someday there will be pdf's :).
>> Frankly, for something like TeXlive, I don't see the point in
>> having PDFs instead of DVI. Take up much more space (how many
>> copied of cmr10 do we want on the disk?) and are much slower to
>> access. TeXlive has a viable and fast viewer for DVI, one could
>> even set up the DVI files to be compiled with source specials into
>> the source tree, and if any Type3 fonts happen to end up in the
>> PDF, they are at fixed resolution, whereas with DVI one still has a
>> chance to render them properly for the configured printer.
> If we could agree on a convention for naming the documentation files
> (so that they are not confused with the actual macro being
> documented) then putting the source of the documentation out there
> would be the best thing IMO.
Well, TeXlive certainly comes with the documentation source. What
isn't there is a system to access it, but the legibility of LaTeX
source would make that a mixed blessing without a special reader.
> If an European puts documentation out there it will likely be in an
> A paper size. An American will use letter size. In either case it is
> an awkward size for someone's printer. Given the .tex version of
> the document one can adjust one or two statements and get the
> correct size for local printing.
Having a more direct way of recompiling documentation might be nice.
I am rather sceptical, however, whether doing this on demand would be
good idea. It would cause delays when you need the info fastest.
> OTOH if you put a dvi out there then I must convert it to to pdf in
> one or two steps and print it via Acrobat Reader, using the "fit to
> paper size" feature. This shrinks the document which makes it harder
> to read. (My eyes are old.)
I don't see that this would be different with preprovided PDF files.
> I haven't tested it this AM but intuitively actual source would be
> smaller than even dvi.
Depends on whether the source listing is included in the target file,
or just the documentation part. For the CTAN browsing clientele, a
PDF without code listing is probably appropriate, for the installed
system, a DVI with code listing and maybe source specials.
The current one-size-fits-all is not really the most persuasive to me.
At one point of time, we'll have to come up with something less rare.
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
More information about the tex-live