On Sat, Oct 22, 2005 at 11:45:50PM +0100, Ted Harding wrote:
> Well, if you're using vim ...
I do.
> First enter the following (in command mode) to define abbreviations:
>
> :ab [cut a lot of good advice]
You mean something like
iabbrev byiwi fileref=""
\format="linespecific">pa
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 03:05:34AM +0200, Bernd Warken wrote:
>
> Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
> >
> > There's a good info viewer that is more like lynx than info.
> > It's called pinfo, and I use it all the time for reading info pages.
>
> Another possibility is dwww. I have it on a Linux Debian sy
> I think the manual should be maintained seperately and simply as a
> basic reference, refering to the info file for more complicated or
> detailed information.
Yes. groff(7) aims to be complete and should be exactly that.
> The first thing to do would be to setup an organized structure of
> wh
> And if you're not comfortable in emacs, you won't like info. [...]
Apparently, you haven't tried info for a longer time. The used keys
are now quite more familiar to other programs.
Werner
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gn
> >> And it's not difficult to see hints of that in texinfo!
> >
> > What exactly do you mean?
>
> Basically the repertoire of keystrokes, which seem to resemble
> EMACS ones; OK if you remember them, which I don't (apart from
> SPACE and BS). However, to be fair, it does seem that 'info' has
> b
On 23-Oct-05 Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2005 at 11:45:50PM +0100, Ted Harding wrote:
>> Well, if you're using vim ...
>
> I do.
>
>> First enter the following (in command mode) to define abbreviations:
>>
>> :ab > [cut a lot of good advice]
>
> You mean something like
>
> iabbre
On Friday, 21 October 2005 at 10:57:26 -0500, Michael Parson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 10:15:57AM +0300, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>
>
>
>> The real reason for this reply is: how do you *display* PDF slide
>> sets? I currently use acroread, which renders well, but it's pretty
>> slow (it
What a lot of traffic there has been on this list lately! I've read
all the messages in this thread that I have received, and this seems
to be the best one to hang my reply on; but I've taken other thoughts
into account.
On Saturday, 22 October 2005 at 14:36:36 +0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>>> Th
[Format recovered--see http://www.lemis.com/email/email-format.html]
Long-short syndrome.
On Saturday, 22 October 2005 at 14:56:35 -0600, Clarke Echols wrote:
> Larry Kollar wrote:
>>
>
>> I use structured FrameMaker at work to write documentation, and one
>> of the easier ways I've found to get
On Saturday, 22 October 2005 at 16:44:12 -0500, Alejandro Lpez-Valencia wrote:
> On 10/22/05, Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2005 at 03:47:19PM -0400, Larry Kollar wrote:
>>> I use structured FrameMaker at work to write documentation, and one of
>>> the easier ways I've found to get tex
> > If a texinfo document appears as a labyrinth, it is badly written,
> > or rather, it has a bad structure.
>
> This is a reasonable, even definitive, statement. But I have the
> feeling that texinfo encourages such bad structure.
How do you get this impression? Of course, texinfo offers @sec
Hi,
When we generate an html document using groff ,
there are several automatically generated .png images
which are to be loaded in the html page.
Typically the web documents have a separate folder
for keeping such images(and other stuff) .Please ,
tell me , how do we do this in groff when w
I downloaded the Foxit PDF Reader and tried it out on some
slides I'm creating. The edges on circle lines look rough.
Acrobat is much cleaner.
I hear about the "Acroread" reader. Is that different from
the Acrobat Reader? I see no reference to it on Adobe web pages.
Clarke
__
Am Sonntag, 23. Oktober 2005 17:59 schrieb Amber Hassaan:
> Hi,
> When we generate an html document using groff ,
> there are several automatically generated .png images
> which are to be loaded in the html page.
>Typically the web documents have a separate folder
> for keeping such images(
On 10/23/05, Clarke Echols wrote:
> I downloaded the Foxit PDF Reader and tried it out on some
> slides I'm creating. The edges on circle lines look rough.
> Acrobat is much cleaner.
>
> I hear about the "Acroread" reader. Is that different from
> the Acrobat Reader? I see no reference to it on
On 23-Oct-05 Clarke Echols wrote:
> I downloaded the Foxit PDF Reader and tried it out on some
> slides I'm creating. The edges on circle lines look rough.
> Acrobat is much cleaner.
>
> I hear about the "Acroread" reader. Is that different from
> the Acrobat Reader? I see no reference to it on
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 03:57:28PM +0300, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> On Friday, 21 October 2005 at 10:57:26 -0500, Michael Parson wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 10:15:57AM +0300, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> The real reason for this reply is: how do you *display* PDF slide
>>> sets
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
Oh, this transition is, I think, a few years old :-) As mentioned in a
just written mail, info is today quite user friendly even for the
non-emacs people.
Yes, it has been a while since I tried info, but didn't think it
has been several years... my iBook (running OSX 10.
You use a totally different tool (Vim) to help another tool that's
supposedly made to help you with XML (FrameMaker).
Yes, but in this case I'm using vim (or rather, piping blocks of
text into shell scripts from vim) to throw down the essential
markup: I can do something like "8!!mks" to: wrap
19 matches
Mail list logo
