Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.236 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.13.139.236;
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 20:15:01 -0800
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: [lojban] The CLL project, technical directions
Message-ID: <20131227041501.GA21848@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Spam_score: 0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 1
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  Preliminary notes: 1. This is a *technical* discussion. I
   have technical questions. There's a lot of text before you get there. Sorry.
    2. This is mostly a private discussion between me and the other potential
    volunteers; I'm having it here for convenience and because it affects the
    community. [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (0.1 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED          ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
                             See
                             http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                              for more information.
                             [URIs: docbook.org]
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
  0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID         DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid


Preliminary notes:

1.  This is a *technical* discussion.  I have technical questions.
There's a lot of text before you get there.  Sorry.

2.  This is mostly a private discussion between me and the other
potential volunteers; I'm having it here for convenience and because
it affects the community.

3.  Before commenting, ask yourself "If I get what I want, will I
have the time/energy/skill/etc to *actually contribute* to this
project?".  If the answer is no, unless you're sure we've missed
something really important, I'd really rather you kept it to
yourself.  This community has a really bad tendency to get bogged
down in bikeshedding (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law_of_triviality ), and
I'm very tired of constant commentary from people who aren't
actually going to do any work.

4.  Before suggesting awesome minimalist markup language X, first
make sure that it has the concept of a glossary and the concept of a
printed, page-numbered index.  Almost all do not.

Actual content:

Reminder of the repo location for reference:

https://github.com/dag/cll

The topic is: "How do we best set up the CLL markup to produce all
the output formats we need, PDF and HTML in particular?".

The end result of the PDF, when printed, should look at least as
good as the current Red Book, and when presented on the web as HTML
should look better than
http://www.lojban.org/publications/reference_grammar/chapter2.html
(cuz that's terrible) and ideally as nice as
http://dag.github.io/cll/ or better.

What prompted me wanting to have a larger discussion around this is
two things:

1.  It's been very hard to get anyone to help me with the deep
technical stuff given the current setup, which is pretty hard to
work with.

2.  I've realized that my ideal of "Here's a source document, and we
can go straight from here to both printed PDF and web-based HTML,
with just a bit of tweaking for visual differences in the two
media", is simply not going to happen; there's no solution that
works like that, at all.  The paths from the source document to PDF
and HTML are going to be radically different, and there's nothing we
can do, so we might as well expect it and structure things around
that expectation.

So.

The current setup is this:

- the markup is basically docbook, but with significant local/fake
  tags, like <selmaho> tags and such.
- we currently convert this to:
  - normal docbook for the HTML
    - the docbook is converted directly to HTML via a very large XSLT
      package not made by us ( see
      http://sourceforge.net/projects/docbook/files/docbook-xsl-ns/ ,
      http://wiki.docbook.org/DocBookXslStylesheets , and other
      resources around the net )
  - quasi-normal docbook for the PDF
    - I say quasi-normal because it includes a <latex-verbatim> tag,
      into which we insert raw LaTeX based on our source markup,
      that is then passed verbatim into the final LaTeX document
    - this mostly-normal docbook is then converted into LaTeX by
      http://dblatex.sourceforge.net/ , which is part XSLT and part
      Python
    - this is then processed via xelatex into a PDF
- we also output other formats based on one of the various
  intermediary stages mentioned above, but these are largely
  straightforward

The part that seems to cause trouble is the conversion from our
source to normal-ish docbook.  This is currently in XSLT.

As a technical person trying to help, you need to have a decent idea
of "I see the following crappy bit in the HTML/PDF; how did that get
there?".

So, my questions to technical people interested in helping:

1.  Do you see any solution better than the current two-fork setup?

2.  Given your expertise (which in turn determines the output format
you'd be helping with), what needs to be streamlined for you to be
able to go "Oh, I see the problem; it's here, I'll go fix that" when
you see an issue in the output?

3.  Assuming the problem is the initial conversion from local source
to docbook, how much would it help if that conversion step was in
Haskell?  What about Ruby?

Feel free to make other commentary, as long as the general thrust is
"I would better be able to help if...".

-Robin

-- 
http://intelligence.org/ :  Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
.i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e
lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e
lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofybakni li'u

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.