DiscoverProgramsOnline

Start getting certified.





============================================================================================================================ On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 05:06:25PM -0500, Nalin Dahyabhai wrote: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 02:57:43PM -0700, Michal Jaegermann wrote: On my 1600x1200 screen I am getting a totally unreadable mess with a bunch of crazy hieroglyphics (icons) with absolutely undecipherable titles. Where some letters can be distinguished they are obviously doubles. What is more there is no obvious way to try to fix this mess (yes, I guessed where some purported configurations may be). The text in your screenshot doesn't look to me like a configuration problem. It looks like a bug, perhaps specific to your hardware, perhaps not. FWIW, on my screen, it's actually readable (running F15 as of this morning). You are extremely generous calling that "text". The hardware is SyncMaster 213T LCD Samsung monitor, 1600x1200, driven by a DVI-0 digital output of a radeon card using kernel modesetting. With something other than gnome-shell this has a very nice and stable picture. I am afraid of even think how this may look on a lesser hardware. Besides, as I already mentioned, color schemes and other settings are absolutely unacceptable (but at this moment at least they do not look like adjustable - I am afraid that this may be another "design decision"). Michal -- test mailing list te ... @lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test Notes from today's call BusDocs 11/8/2010 Michael, Rob, Tim, Josef, Bruce Problems of round trip between aggregated document and map If you move or delete a topic in the map, how does the aggregated doc know what to do? in map such that you don't want it in the aggregated document. If the map is altered, the person making the change is responsible for consequences. There must be a content architect. 1. Simple scenario: agg auth is for subset of DITA users In that subset, the map doesn't get modified. Rearranging order can be OK -- my call was dropped "UCM down, features disabled" -- 2. Can create alternative maps, generate alternative agg docs. 3. Someone wants to 'enhance' a map element for publishing purpose (, etc.) One solution is to use a secondary map for intruded content. 4. If we manage ag doc as monolithic doc, n.p. But reuse, routing for review, etc. Can reuse by conref in composite topic. 5. If map architect wants to make more intrusive changes to the map (add, delete, move), it's just like someone making such changes with no consideration of agg auth. 6. One version as above, second version could specialize to support keeping track of such matters by persisting relevant subset of map attributes and elements in the agg doc. Probably Michael will want this, just to cover the propensity of adopters to do whatever is possible, even if we advise against it. Tagless editors may not be able to handle all that is required. Users of tagged editors will want to keep the tag set as simple as possible. So will it be practical? We shouldn't presume the answer. Josef: Experienced 'frequent writers' ('professional' writers) are fine working with a map. Restrict what the less capable writers can do so as to avoid problems. The basic form of a document is as a map and topics, the agg doc form is temporary for authoring. Restrict the changes in the aggregated state. Simplistic users won't make such changes anyway. Only more capable authors can make such changes, and they do it in the map. Rob: May be working with a file system, not a CMS. In that case, everything stays in the aggregated document, there is no occasion for a map. Bruce: This sounds more and more like an Adoption TC issue. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php