FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-12-2008, 02:34 AM
"s. keeling"
 
Default reStructured Text real world usage

T o n g <mlist4suntong@yahoo.com>:
>
> Maybe, but I'll encourage you to also take a look at AsciiDoc.

I'm trying to give it a go. I've plopped sourceforge's tarball into
my ~/.emacs.d, and I've added:

(add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '(".doc$" . doc-mode))
(autoload 'doc-mode "doc-mode")

to my ~/.emacs

---------------------------
File mode specification error: (file-error "Cannot open load file"
"doc-mode")
---------------------------


--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292
- - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Please, don't Cc: me.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 04-12-2008, 10:16 PM
Tzafrir Cohen
 
Default reStructured Text real world usage

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 08:54:40AM -0400, Brian McKee wrote:
>
> On 9-Apr-08, at 11:12 PM, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:
> >Hey Everyone,
> >
> >Inspired by the easy to use wiki syntax, I've been looking around
> >for similar markups that allow for basic "rich text" output.
> >
>
> I actually use a wiki currently - tiddlyWiki - and I edit the text
> in it with Vim using the It's All Text plugin for Firefox.
> Since it's a one page portable wiki (no server required) it's
> completely cross platform - I can carry it around on a USB stick and
> edit it where ever I'm at.
> It's not a perfect solution, but it doesn't bug me so much I've
> replaced it yet.

Mixing code and data is not my preffered method.

BTW: I do use asciidoc occasionally.


--
Tzafrir Cohen | tzafrir@jabber.org | VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's
tzafrir@cohens.org.il | | best
ICQ# 16849754 | | friend


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 04-13-2008, 08:27 AM
Amit Uttamchandani
 
Default reStructured Text real world usage

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 22:40:01 +0000 (UTC)
T o n g <mlist4suntong@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:12:03 -0700, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:
>
> > Inspired by the easy to use wiki syntax, I've been looking around for
> > similar markups that allow for basic "rich text" output.
> >
> > The most promising markup I came across is reStructured Text. It is quite
> > straightforward to use and seems like it can output to pretty much
> > anything out there. It is also implemented in Python I think, which I am
> > quite familiar with, so that's a plus.
> >
> > Now, the situation is, I write a lot of notes in class on my laptop. I
> > pretty much just use Vim and just type it out. . .
> >
> > Now, when I print this out...it is just as is. Sometimes I have some code
> > written and I want it all "pretty printed" with the heading, italics, etc.
>
> Maybe, but I'll encourage you to also take a look at AsciiDoc.
>
> http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/nix/tool/asciidoc-usg/
> http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/nix/tool/asciidoc-syn/
>
> because on closely read what you asked for and what the answers given, I
> believe AsciiDoc beats all the suggestions so far.
>
> - wiki, or markdown, their syntax are still not straight forward as AsciiDoc
> - one-page wiki engine is nice, but I guess you would look at the source
> of your note, than the presentation of it most of the time.
> - latex, yes, I use it to write my thesis, but not to take notes.
>
> The AsciiDoc syntax is near plain text. It is best for people who work on
> the text source most of the time, e.g., for note taking IMHO. I use it
> publish all the notes that I took. And it wasn't hard to follow/convert my
> existing notes.
>
> AsciiDoc is so well known that it has plug-ins that allows you do syntax
> highlighting as well, for Vim & Emacs, etc. Here is one for Emacs
>
> http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/doc-mode/
>
> Take a look at the "1.2. Screen Shots" section, you will see how easy
> AsciiDoc syntax is.
>
> Moreover, AsciiDoc uses Python, which is a plus for you.
>

Wow...I think you have solved my problem. I took one look at this and this is it. I am downloading the source as I'm writing this email and will post back results. Thank you for this.

Amit


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 04-14-2008, 04:34 PM
Brian McKee
 
Default reStructured Text real world usage

On 12-Apr-08, at 6:16 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 08:54:40AM -0400, Brian McKee wrote:


On 9-Apr-08, at 11:12 PM, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:

Hey Everyone,

Inspired by the easy to use wiki syntax, I've been looking around
for similar markups that allow for basic "rich text" output.



I actually use a wiki currently - tiddlyWiki - and I edit the text
in it with Vim using the It's All Text plugin for Firefox.
Since it's a one page portable wiki (no server required) it's
completely cross platform - I can carry it around on a USB stick and
edit it where ever I'm at.
It's not a perfect solution, but it doesn't bug me so much I've
replaced it yet.


Mixing code and data is not my preffered method.



It's not really - Is a pdf file mixing data and code? or latex?
Wiki syntax is less 'code' then those - and the raw data is still
there as entered when you hit the edit button the next time.


I use it because I've come to rely pretty heavily on the easy linking
to both internal and external data that wiki's provide.


Latex and AsciiDoc (I looked very quickly) have that 'compile as a
separate step' process I find irritating. My output is in the
format I need it in as soon as I hit the 'done' button, and still
ready to be edited when I hit the 'edit' button. Granted, I don't
have the wide range of output options provided by markup/compile
cycle setups like Latex, but I don't need them....


Brian
 
Old 04-15-2008, 01:47 AM
Tzafrir Cohen
 
Default reStructured Text real world usage

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 12:34:00PM -0400, Brian McKee wrote:
>
> On 12-Apr-08, at 6:16 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 08:54:40AM -0400, Brian McKee wrote:
> >>
> >>On 9-Apr-08, at 11:12 PM, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:
> >>>Hey Everyone,
> >>>
> >>>Inspired by the easy to use wiki syntax, I've been looking around
> >>>for similar markups that allow for basic "rich text" output.
> >>>
> >>
> >>I actually use a wiki currently - tiddlyWiki - and I edit the text
> >>in it with Vim using the It's All Text plugin for Firefox.
> >>Since it's a one page portable wiki (no server required) it's
> >>completely cross platform - I can carry it around on a USB stick and
> >>edit it where ever I'm at.
> >>It's not a perfect solution, but it doesn't bug me so much I've
> >>replaced it yet.
> >
> >Mixing code and data is not my preffered method.
> >
>
> It's not really - Is a pdf file mixing data and code? or latex?

LaTeX and PostScript (though not PDF) allow a similar the same level
of programability that HTML+Javascript (as used in many browsers) does.

It is not often abused as in the way it is done in in tiddlyWiki . If
you have complex (La)TeX code in your document, you'd probably make it a
separate style / package.

> Wiki syntax is less 'code' then those - and the raw data is still
> there as entered when you hit the edit button the next time.

What happens when you find a bug in the code that implements the
interpetation of the wiki?

And how do I know that the document you give me doesn't really log all
of my details to your server? I have to re-inspect the code with each
and every document. It is javascript that is run locally on my system
and hence my browser assumes it is a bit more trustworthy.

Indeed tiddlyWiki.org is hosted on a mediawiki.

>
> I use it because I've come to rely pretty heavily on the easy linking
> to both internal and external data that wiki's provide.
>
> Latex and AsciiDoc (I looked very quickly) have that 'compile as a
> separate step' process I find irritating. My output is in the
> format I need it in as soon as I hit the 'done' button, and still
> ready to be edited when I hit the 'edit' button. Granted, I don't
> have the wide range of output options provided by markup/compile
> cycle setups like Latex, but I don't need them....

But then again, everybody must use your code to view your data.

--
Tzafrir Cohen | tzafrir@jabber.org | VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's
tzafrir@cohens.org.il | | best
ICQ# 16849754 | | friend


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 04-15-2008, 12:49 PM
Brian McKee
 
Default reStructured Text real world usage

On 14-Apr-08, at 9:47 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 12:34:00PM -0400, Brian McKee wrote:

On 12-Apr-08, at 6:16 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 08:54:40AM -0400, Brian McKee wrote:

On 9-Apr-08, at 11:12 PM, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:

Inspired by the easy to use wiki syntax, I've been looking around
for similar markups that allow for basic "rich text" output.



I actually use a wiki currently - tiddlyWiki - and I edit the text
in it with Vim using the It's All Text plugin for Firefox.
Since it's a one page portable wiki (no server required) it's
completely cross platform - I can carry it around on a USB stick
and

edit it where ever I'm at.



Mixing code and data is not my preffered method.



It's not really - Is a pdf file mixing data and code? or latex?





LaTeX and PostScript (though not PDF) allow a similar the same level
of programability that HTML+Javascript (as used in many browsers)
does.



It is not often abused as in the way it is done in in tiddlyWiki . If
you have complex (La)TeX code in your document, you'd probably make
it a

separate style / package.



Wiki syntax is less 'code' then those - and the raw data is still
there as entered when you hit the edit button the next time.



What happens when you find a bug in the code that implements the
interpetation of the wiki?


Then you re-edit it - the original text is still there unmangled.


And how do I know that the document you give me doesn't really log all
of my details to your server? I have to re-inspect the code with each
and every document. It is javascript that is run locally on my system
and hence my browser assumes it is a bit more trustworthy.

Indeed tiddlyWiki.org is hosted on a mediawiki.


The tiddlyWiki itself is self-contained and runs fine off-line,
(although there are plug ins to make it run on a server)
but I grant you it's not easily verifiable....


I use it because I've come to rely pretty heavily on the easy linking
to both internal and external data that wiki's provide.

Latex and AsciiDoc (I looked very quickly) have that 'compile as a
separate step' process I find irritating. My output is in the
format I need it in as soon as I hit the 'done' button, and still
ready to be edited when I hit the 'edit' button. Granted, I don't
have the wide range of output options provided by markup/compile
cycle setups like Latex, but I don't need them....


But then again, everybody must use your code to view your data.


I agree with you it's quite unsuitable for redistribution.
When I do need to export data from it I use 'print to pdf' and
distribute the pdf.
Not as flexible as the other systems, but it's almost exclusively my
notes and to-do lists,
it's not intended to be sent anywhere. I find it handy for the
OP's use case - taking notes.
When it's a very often edited document (e.g. I edit my to-do list a
dozen times a day or more)
the 'make' step is too much, and the html rendering I have is all I
need.


Hope that explains the different pros and cons as I see them.

Brian
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:01 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org