Walter wrote:
> "J. Daniel Smith" <J_Daniel_Smith@HoTMaiL.com> wrote in message
> news:b8c0du$r6f$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>These days I would say that PDF is *MUCH* more widespread than raw PS
> 
> files;
> 
>>the Adobe Acrobat Reader is the way to go (and it even works as a "plug
> 
> in"
> 
>>in IE).
> 
> 
> That's true, but pdf has its own bugs. You can't cut bits of text to the
> clipboard. You can't convert it to text without emailing it to an Adobe
> service, which produces raw text that is nearly unusable. (That said,
> Google's translater is much better.) The IE plugin renders PDF files in a
> blurry font. The page format just doesn't fit well on a typical computer
> display.
> 
> HTML doesn't suffer from any of these problems. HTML automatically adjusts
> to your display size (bring up some of the DMC online documentation, and
> resize the window!), it's rendered crisply, it's easy to use without any
> proprietary tools (I do all my HTML with a simple text editor), it can be
> read by practically any machine, and if that fails, you can still read it
> with an ordinary text editor.
> 
> The DMC++ documentation was originally all in pdf. I converted it all to
> HTML, and am well convinced of the superiority of the latter. Just compare
> the two side by side!

So, what does the DMC++ documentation look like on the printed page? Yeah, you don't really know, and you don't particularly care - and I'm not saying you should.  But if you DID care, then you'd be better served by PDF.

PostScript was designed during the bad old days of DOS and the million WordPerfect printer drivers.  It's a language for describing a printed page as accurately as possible.  (The original intent was to create a higher-level abstraction and API for printed output, so that printer interfaces and languages did not continue to proliferate.  Though it was a staple of the Apple/Adobe desktop publishing platform, the Windows GDI, with vendor-written printer drivers, kinda killed the idea on the PC.)

PS is not intended to be human-authored or editable; it's to be program-generated and shipped to the printed page.  And, as PDF is mostly just encapsulated PS, it has the same characteristic.  You're supposed to author and edit your documents in some other tool, then render to PDF for distribution to millions who *intend* *to* *print* *it*.

HTML is mostly derived from (I think; at the very least, inspired by) SGML, which *was* designed for human consumption as plain text.  So it's easy to author and edit, it's easy to read and revise, but you can't say what it will look like when printed, except in the most general terms.

(BTW I am able to copy selected text from a PDF to the clipboard. What's the problem there?)

>> That's a spec for the 64 bit Itanium. I need it for the 32 bit x86 processors.
>> 
>
>IIRC it was originally targeted for Itanium/funded by Intel&HP, but it's now used for all arch's.  Checkout the ACCU overview link.

what link could you post it here

thanks

> The DMC++ documentation was originally all in pdf. I converted it all to HTML, and am well convinced of the superiority of the latter. Just compare the two side by side!
> 

Ever considered using Help&Maual?  Table of contents, cross references etc, etc.
Outputs document in HTML, PDF, WORD(RTF),  .HLP, .CHM and e-books.
Provides a gui interface for designing document.

"Karl Bochert" <kbochert@copper.net> wrote in message news:1103_1051984547@bose...
> > The DMC++ documentation was originally all in pdf. I converted it all to HTML, and am well convinced of the superiority of the latter. Just
compare
> > the two side by side!
> >
>
> Ever considered using Help&Maual?  Table of contents, cross references
etc, etc.
> Outputs document in HTML, PDF, WORD(RTF),  .HLP, .CHM and e-books. Provides a gui interface for designing document.

I'm not familiar with it. But I will suggest that once one is familiar with how html works, having a gui interface is not likely to help much. Right click and 'view source' on some of the html files on the web site.

On Sat, 3 May 2003 14:20:59 -0700, "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> 
> "Karl Bochert" <kbochert@copper.net> wrote in message news:1103_1051984547@bose...
> > > The DMC++ documentation was originally all in pdf. I converted it all to HTML, and am well convinced of the superiority of the latter. Just
> compare
> > > the two side by side!
> > >
> >
> > Ever considered using Help&Maual?  Table of contents, cross references
> etc, etc.
> > Outputs document in HTML, PDF, WORD(RTF),  .HLP, .CHM and e-books. Provides a gui interface for designing document.
> 
> I'm not familiar with it. But I will suggest that once one is familiar with how html works, having a gui interface is not likely to help much. Right click and 'view source' on some of the html files on the web site.
> 

Your manual is an excellent example of clear and straight-forward html.
(ISort of illustrates why you are good at writing  compilers!)

The gui interface is more than just a WYSIWYG editor. It has a separate
window for editing the TOC, and menus with many tools to assist with things
like keywords, links, outlines, booklet printing, etc.
Just the thing for a documentation putz like me.

see <www.ec-software.com>

"Karl Bochert" <kbochert@copper.net> wrote in message news:1103_1052037017@bose...
> Your manual is an excellent example of clear and straight-forward html. (ISort of illustrates why you are good at writing  compilers!)

Thanks!

> The gui interface is more than just a WYSIWYG editor. It has a separate window for editing the TOC, and menus with many tools to assist with
things
> like keywords, links, outlines, booklet printing, etc.
> Just the thing for a documentation putz like me.

If you find it useful, I won't argue with that.

> see <www.ec-software.com>