Thread: Cognitive dissonance
Unix is a text-based operating system with unbelievably helpful text manipulation tools. Postgres is a creature of Unix which happens to have unbelievable text searching and manipulation tools. Yet, the only one file edition of the Postgres documentation is in...pdf format. Huh? I know. I know. I have already brought this up. And various ways of creating a one file text edition of the documentation have been proposed to me. I know. But either I am a visitor from the Crab Nebula, or there is someone else out there who would like to have a text file of the entire documentation. Two examples from other applications. I use Vim. Vim's documentation is as easy to access as any documentation on earth...as long as you know exactly what you are looking for. Otherwise, it is a tremendous pain. I also use the National Library of Medicine's MeSH subject headings. 25,000 descriptors with definitions, synonyms and a lot of other things. They give it to you in single files either as text, xml, or other ways. Big files. Hundreds of megabytes. That makes it so that you can do just about anything with it you want. It is one of the seven wonders of the world. I do suggest that a plain text file of the entire documentation be made part of the documentation armamentarium. Respectfully, John Gage
John Gage wrote: > I also use the National Library of Medicine's MeSH subject headings. > 25,000 descriptors with definitions, synonyms and a lot of other things. > They give it to you in single files either as text, xml, or other ways. > Big files. Hundreds of megabytes. That makes it so that you can do just > about anything with it you want. It is one of the seven wonders of the > world. > > I do suggest that a plain text file of the entire documentation be made > part of the documentation armamentarium. From <http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/>: "The DocBook SGML source for the manuals is available as part of the PostgreSQL source download available in the FTP area." -- Lew
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 4:04 AM, John Gage <jsmgage@numericable.fr> wrote: > Unix is a text-based operating system with unbelievably helpful text > manipulation tools. > > Postgres is a creature of Unix which happens to have unbelievable text > searching and manipulation tools. > > Yet, the only one file edition of the Postgres documentation is in...pdf > format. Huh? > I suppose the next thing you'll be suggesting is that, because Postgres is a database, the documentation should be stored as some form of searchable table within the database itself....? <runs and hides/> -- Peter Hunsberger
On 6/8/2010 9:23 AM, Peter Hunsberger wrote: > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 4:04 AM, John Gage<jsmgage@numericable.fr> wrote: > >> Unix is a text-based operating system with unbelievably helpful text >> manipulation tools. >> >> Postgres is a creature of Unix which happens to have unbelievable text >> searching and manipulation tools. >> >> Yet, the only one file edition of the Postgres documentation is in...pdf >> format. Huh? >> >> > I suppose the next thing you'll be suggesting is that, because > Postgres is a database, the documentation should be stored as some > form of searchable table within the database itself....? > > <runs and hides/> > > Its also available in chm windows help file format. Which i find allot more useful http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/ you could print chm to a text file. also it not hard to dump a PDF document into a text file. All legitimate Magwerks Corporation quotations are sent in a .PDF file attachment with a unique ID number generated by ourproprietary quotation system. Quotations received via any other form of communication will not be honored. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including attachments, may contain legally privileged, confidential or other informationproprietary to Magwerks Corporation and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it addresses.If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified thatany unauthorized viewing, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have receivedthis e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and destroy all occurrences of this e-mailimmediately. Thank you.
Attachment
* John Gage (jsmgage@numericable.fr) wrote:
> But either I am a visitor from the Crab Nebula, or there is someone else
> out there who would like to have a text file of the entire
> documentation.
Soo.. there are quite a few man pages, and in-psql's help is also
pretty nice (\h <command> and \?). That's certainly what I typically
use. I admit that we don't include the full command description in the
\h (just the syntax), but that's still extremely useful.
Would a \h+ that gave you the text from the web-page be useful..? That,
plus the various man pages, would cover an awful lot of what's in SGML..
Thanks,
Stephen
Attachment
Thank you all for your suggestions. Thank you very much. John 1) I suppose the next thing you'll be suggesting is that, because Postgres is a database, the documentation should be stored as some form of searchable table within the database itself....? <runs and hides/> ------Well, that is exactly what I have done with the MeSH subject headings. And it works like a charm. 2) Its also available in chm windows help file format. Which i find allot more useful http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/ you could print chm to a text file. ------I'll have to boot over to XP, ugh. Will do. 3) also it not hard to dump a PDF document into a text file. ------I would print out what the dump looks like, but this is a family program 4) Would a \h+ that gave you the text from the web-page be useful..? That, plus the various man pages, would cover an awful lot of what's in SGML.. From <http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/>: "The DocBook SGML source for the manuals is available as part of the PostgreSQL source download available in the FTP area." -----I'm headed there. It's just that given the incredibly good documentation and the fact that it's available in just about every format except a text file, I was sort of hoping for a policy change on the part of the powers that be.
justin@magwerks.com (Justin Graf) writes: > Its also available in chm windows help file format. Which i find allot > more useful > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/ > you could print chm to a text file. > > also it not hard to dump a PDF document into a text file. I wish I could find a converter that would generate one of the common eBook formats (epub, mobi). There do exist CHM readers on mobile platforms such as Android, but they're much clumsier to work with than the rather more heavily used eBook readers. I have poked around for conversions; nothing particularly suitable has emerged :-(. -- select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'cbbrowne.com'; http://cbbrowne.com/info/internet.html "MS apparently now has a team dedicated to tracking problems with Linux and publicizing them. I guess eventually they'll figure out this back fires... ;)" -- William Burrow <aa126@DELETE.fan.nb.ca>
***SNIP*** > 2) Its also available in chm windows help file format. Which i find > allot > more useful > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/ > you could print chm to a text file. > > ------I'll have to boot over to XP, ugh. Will do. There are linux chm readers http://www.linux.com/news/software/applications/8209-chm-viewers-for-linux and one for firefox https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3235/ All legitimate Magwerks Corporation quotations are sent in a .PDF file attachment with a unique ID number generated by ourproprietary quotation system. Quotations received via any other form of communication will not be honored. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including attachments, may contain legally privileged, confidential or other informationproprietary to Magwerks Corporation and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it addresses.If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified thatany unauthorized viewing, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have receivedthis e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and destroy all occurrences of this e-mailimmediately. Thank you.
Attachment
Justin Graf wrote: > There are linux chm readers > ... Note that even Microsoft deprecated CHM back in 2003 after it was realized it was full of potential security exploits that couldn't readily be abated.
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:04 AM, John Gage <jsmgage@numericable.fr> wrote: > I do suggest that a plain text file of the entire documentation be made part > of the documentation armamentarium. Not that I see a whole lot of utility in this endeavor, but it's possible to do a decent PDF to plain text conversion. I tried some of the online tools that do this and found <http://www.pdftextonline.com> to do the best job with the Postgres manual. I didn't bother trying any client-side applications which do the same job. Attached is a short snippet of a text export of the PDF manual. Josh
Attachment
1) On a list that howls with complaints when posts are in html, it is surprising that there is resistance to the idea of documentation in plain text. 2) Posters are correctly referred to the documentation as frequently as possible. In fact, very frequently. The frequency might decrease if the documentation were in plain text. It is easier to search a single plain text file than any other source, except perhaps the database itself. 3) Postgres is getting pushed off the map at the low end by MySQL, now owned by Oracle. If Postgres ceased to exist, Ellison would be thrilled. I chose A2 Hosting (with whom I am very happy) for my website because they support Postgres. I'm writing cgi scripts in perl. I had to install the postgres driver for dbi. It was not pre- installed. There are about four buttons for MySQL on the cPanel and two farther over on the right for Postgres. An anecdote. I discovered the tsvector functionality a while back. I have used it to create indices for my text files and several other tasks. I recently was re-looking at my files and saw "tsvector::text". I had forgotten that the double colon is one way to cast a type. Double colon is not in the html index of the documentation. I found it by searching my plain text version of the pdf file. In my opinion, the html documentation is useful for reading it like a novel or referencing it in these lists. On Jun 8, 2010, at 9:56 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote: > Not that I see a whole lot of utility in this endeavor
John Gage wrote: > Posters are correctly referred to the documentation as frequently as > possible. In fact, very frequently. The frequency might decrease if > the documentation were in plain text. It is easier to search a single > plain text file than any other source, except perhaps the database > itself. In reality searches are being done on the web, which combines the HTML version of the official documentation with blog posts, presentation materials, the wiki, and similar other resources. This is why I don't actually care about a text version of the docs; I've just gotten used to using Google to search the PostgreSQL documentation. The occasional time when I know I just want to search the manual instead, I can search the PDF version. Neither of those are great solutions, but they're good enough that it's not worth fighting to build a text version over as I see it. I'd use it if it were around, but there's little motivation for most of us to work on it. > Postgres is getting pushed off the map at the low end by MySQL, now > owned by Oracle. The dynamics are much more complicated than that. Big MySQL sites are switching to NoSQL; medium sized MySQL sites are switching to PostgreSQL to get rid of scaling and reliability issues (I personally have been seeing a lot of this from Rails installs lately); small to medium size Oracle shops are switching to PostgreSQL to lower licensing costs. The idea that plain-text documentation for the database would be a significant driver in any of these trends would be greatly exaggerating the significance of a technical detail important to a pretty small number of people. On my personal list of "things that could be improved in the documentation", good plain text format is there, but there's a whole lot of things above it. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.us
On 09/06/2010, John Gage <jsmgage@numericable.fr> wrote: > 1) On a list that howls with complaints when posts are in html, it is > surprising that there is resistance to the idea of documentation in > plain text. > > 2) Posters are correctly referred to the documentation as frequently > as possible. In fact, very frequently. The frequency might decrease > if the documentation were in plain text. It is easier to search a > single plain text file than any other source, except perhaps the > database itself. > > 3) Postgres is getting pushed off the map at the low end by MySQL, now > owned by Oracle. If Postgres ceased to exist, Ellison would be > thrilled. I chose A2 Hosting (with whom I am very happy) for my > website because they support Postgres. I'm writing cgi scripts in > perl. I had to install the postgres driver for dbi. It was not pre- > installed. There are about four buttons for MySQL on the cPanel and > two farther over on the right for Postgres. > > An anecdote. I discovered the tsvector functionality a while back. I > have used it to create indices for my text files and several other > tasks. I recently was re-looking at my files and saw > "tsvector::text". I had forgotten that the double colon is one way to > cast a type. Double colon is not in the html index of the > documentation. I found it by searching my plain text version of the > pdf file. In my opinion, the html documentation is useful for reading > it like a novel or referencing it in these lists. > > > On Jun 8, 2010, at 9:56 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote: > >> Not that I see a whole lot of utility in this endeavor Personally I like to use html docs, and it would be good if the documentation were downloadable from the postgresql website in other formats, for convenience... But, what I use is this, which works pretty well: (e.g. to get the 8.1 dosc) mkdir postgresql cd postgresql wget -r -nH -l 10 -k -np http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/index.html ... then after it all downloads: open the file docs/8.1/interactive/index.html in your web browser. e.g. links docs/8.1/interactive/index.html HTML is "text", so you can search using grep e.g. grep -r "ALTER TABLE .* ADD COLUMN" docs/8.1 > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general > -- Brian Modra Land line: +27 23 5411 462 Mobile: +27 79 69 77 082 5 Jan Louw Str, Prince Albert, 6930 Postal: P.O. Box 2, Prince Albert 6930 South Africa http://www.zwartberg.com/ Fax: +27865510467
Brian Modra schrieb: > Personally I like to use html docs, and it would be good if the > documentation were downloadable from the postgresql website in other > formats, for convenience... > > But, what I use is this, which works pretty well: > > (e.g. to get the 8.1 dosc) > > mkdir postgresql > cd postgresql > wget -r -nH -l 10 -k -np > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/index.html > > ... then after it all downloads: > > open the file docs/8.1/interactive/index.html > in your web browser. > > e.g. > links docs/8.1/interactive/index.html > > > HTML is "text", so you can search using grep e.g. > grep -r "ALTER TABLE .* ADD COLUMN" docs/8.1 Thats the way i do too. A huge pdf is often not very helpful. In my personal case i programm often in a train, using my laptop. Searching a PDF with more than 1.000 pages really hits my battery. With html-files i could preselect the items to search. Also it's possible to import the html-files in a postgres-db and using fulltext-search. ;) Greetings, Torsten -- http://www.dddbl.de - ein Datenbank-Layer, der die Arbeit mit 8 verschiedenen Datenbanksystemen abstrahiert, Queries von Applikationen trennt und automatisch die Query-Ergebnisse auswerten kann.
My tupp'th: Formatted text, whether PDF, HTML or (heaven forbid!) Word Documents, is easier to read than unformatted plain text, and those of us without the OP's very admirable proficiency in vi remain at the mercy of the various readers and their associated search functions. However, I sure that it's not too arduous a task to extract the text in these documents and strip them of their formatting? Or am I missing something?
Dave Coventry <dgcoventry@gmail.com> writes: > Formatted text, whether PDF, HTML or (heaven forbid!) Word Documents, > is easier to read than unformatted plain text, and those of us without > the OP's very admirable proficiency in vi remain at the mercy of the > various readers and their associated search functions. > > However, I sure that it's not too arduous a task to extract the text > in these documents and strip them of their formatting? > > Or am I missing something? Info documentation format. Text based, super user aware, easy to browse and search, has an index. You can even produce postgres.info today, it's just not optimised to be very friendly, it's missing mainly convenient table support and index. Regards, -- dim
Excerpts from John Gage's message of mié jun 09 01:28:54 -0400 2010: > I recently was re-looking at my files and saw > "tsvector::text". I had forgotten that the double colon is one way to > cast a type. Double colon is not in the html index of the > documentation. I just added an index entry for ::, thanks for pointing out that it was missing. If you notice other missing index entries, do not hesitate to point it out in this mailing list or pgsql-docs. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Brian Modra wrote: > Personally I like to use html docs, and it would be good if the > documentation were downloadable from the postgresql website in other > formats, for convenience... Good thing it is, then, albeit not in the most convenient format, i.e., DocBook. But then, from there you can generate pretty much any format you want, right? -- Lew
On tis, 2010-06-08 at 11:04 +0200, John Gage wrote: > > Yet, the only one file edition of the Postgres documentation is > in...pdf format. Huh? > > I know. I know. I have already brought this up. And various ways > of > creating a one file text edition of the documentation have been > proposed to me. I know. > > But either I am a visitor from the Crab Nebula, or there is someone > else out there who would like to have a text file of the entire > documentation. As I said back then, doing this is straightforward, but we kind of need more than one user who asks for it before we make it part of a regular service, which comes with maintenance costs.
Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue jun 10 02:50:14 -0400 2010: > On tis, 2010-06-08 at 11:04 +0200, John Gage wrote: > > > > Yet, the only one file edition of the Postgres documentation is > > in...pdf format. Huh? > > > > I know. I know. I have already brought this up. And various ways > > of > > creating a one file text edition of the documentation have been > > proposed to me. I know. > > > > But either I am a visitor from the Crab Nebula, or there is someone > > else out there who would like to have a text file of the entire > > documentation. > > As I said back then, doing this is straightforward, but we kind of need > more than one user who asks for it before we make it part of a regular > service, which comes with maintenance costs. Hey, count me as another interested person in a single-file plain-text doc output format. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue jun 10 02:50:14 -0400 2010:
>> As I said back then, doing this is straightforward, but we kind of need
>> more than one user who asks for it before we make it part of a regular
>> service, which comes with maintenance costs.
> Hey, count me as another interested person in a single-file plain-text
> doc output format.
Well, there are two separate things here:
* providing a Makefile target to build plain-text output.
* shipping prebuilt plain text docs in standard distributions.
I am for #1, not so much for #2, mainly on the grounds of size. But
given #1 it would be possible for packagers to make their own choices
about whether to include plain-text docs.
regards, tom lane
On Thursday 10. June 2010 17.24.00 Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > > Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue jun 10 02:50:14 -0400 2010: > >> As I said back then, doing this is straightforward, but we kind of need > >> more than one user who asks for it before we make it part of a regular > >> service, which comes with maintenance costs. > > > Hey, count me as another interested person in a single-file plain-text > > doc output format. > > Well, there are two separate things here: > > * providing a Makefile target to build plain-text output. > > * shipping prebuilt plain text docs in standard distributions. > > I am for #1, not so much for #2, mainly on the grounds of size. But > given #1 it would be possible for packagers to make their own choices > about whether to include plain-text docs. Wouldn't it suffice to make it downloadable, like the pdf doc? regards, -- Leif Biberg Kristensen http://solumslekt.org/blog/
Like all visitors from the Crab Nebula (except our leaders who are genetically separate) I qualify as a novice when it comes to Postgres. What is more, the people (humans, that is) who need the documentation the most are those who, well, need the documentation the most. Hence, if this were to be made available, it would be great if it was novice speed. Thanks everyone for even contemplating it. John >> Well, there are two separate things here: >> >> * providing a Makefile target to build plain-text output. >> >> * shipping prebuilt plain text docs in standard distributions. >> >> I am for #1, not so much for #2, mainly on the grounds of size. But >> given #1 it would be possible for packagers to make their own choices >> about whether to include plain-text docs. > > Wouldn't it suffice to make it downloadable, like the pdf doc? >
Leif Biberg Kristensen skrev 2010-06-10 17.33: > On Thursday 10. June 2010 17.24.00 Tom Lane wrote: >> Alvaro Herrera<alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: >>> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue jun 10 02:50:14 -0400 > 2010: >>>> As I said back then, doing this is straightforward, but we kind of need >>>> more than one user who asks for it before we make it part of a regular >>>> service, which comes with maintenance costs. >> >>> Hey, count me as another interested person in a single-file plain-text >>> doc output format. >> >> Well, there are two separate things here: >> >> * providing a Makefile target to build plain-text output. >> >> * shipping prebuilt plain text docs in standard distributions. >> >> I am for #1, not so much for #2, mainly on the grounds of size. But >> given #1 it would be possible for packagers to make their own choices >> about whether to include plain-text docs. > > Wouldn't it suffice to make it downloadable, like the pdf doc? And/or make the HTML version downloadable side by side with the PDF. There are good reasons for wanting access to the complete document when being offline. PDF is not such a bad format but it do have some limitations as have been previously mentioned. As for building the docs I don't think everyone, not even all developers, has the tool chain installed (or even wants to). Regards, roppert > > regards,
Robert Gravsjö wrote: > >> I am for #1, not so much for #2, mainly on the grounds of size. But > >> given #1 it would be possible for packagers to make their own choices > >> about whether to include plain-text docs. > > > > Wouldn't it suffice to make it downloadable, like the pdf doc? > > And/or make the HTML version downloadable side by side with the PDF. That might be easy to do. We already build the HTML, and requiring people to recursively use wget is not user-friendly. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + None of us is going to be here forever. +
A one file html version would be a godsend. On Jun 12, 2010, at 3:20 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Robert Gravsjö wrote: >>>> I am for #1, not so much for #2, mainly on the grounds of size. >>>> But >>>> given #1 it would be possible for packagers to make their own >>>> choices >>>> about whether to include plain-text docs. >>> >>> Wouldn't it suffice to make it downloadable, like the pdf doc? >> >> And/or make the HTML version downloadable side by side with the PDF. > > That might be easy to do. We already build the HTML, and requiring > people to recursively use wget is not user-friendly. > > -- > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us > EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com > > + None of us is going to be here forever. + > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On lör, 2010-06-12 at 11:18 +0200, John Gage wrote: > A one file html version would be a godsend. I've committed a build target for that now. Use 'make postgres.html' in doc/src/sgml/.
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On lör, 2010-06-12 at 11:18 +0200, John Gage wrote:
>> A one file html version would be a godsend.
> I've committed a build target for that now. Use 'make postgres.html' in
> doc/src/sgml/.
Huh, is that actually worth anything? How many browsers will open it
without crashing, or will navigate the page with decent performance
if they do manage to open it?
(Not that I object to providing this Make target. But I thought the
discussion was about plain-text output.)
regards, tom lane
It was. But if the compromise is single file html, that is a vast improvement over the current system imho. What I want is the thing that is maximally amenable to being searched conveniently using all the tools at our disposal especially regular expressons. The point has been made that Google is the best system to search for Postgres documentation/knowledge/etc. Frankly, I don't necessarily agree with that, particularly for the novice. The documentation is where it is at, and it is the documentation that is referenced the most in these posts. But there are no dichotomies here. It is not either or. It is a balance between what is easiest to produce and maintain and what is most productive to use. And the background for my request is my respect for the extraordinary power and elegance of postgres. John On Jun 12, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >> On lör, 2010-06-12 at 11:18 +0200, John Gage wrote: >>> A one file html version would be a godsend. > >> I've committed a build target for that now. Use 'make >> postgres.html' in >> doc/src/sgml/. > > Huh, is that actually worth anything? How many browsers will open it > without crashing, or will navigate the page with decent performance > if they do manage to open it? > > (Not that I object to providing this Make target. But I thought the > discussion was about plain-text output.) > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > I've committed a build target for that now. Use 'make postgres.html' in
> > doc/src/sgml/.
>
> Huh, is that actually worth anything? How many browsers will open it
> without crashing, or will navigate the page with decent performance
> if they do manage to open it?
If it works with links, that'd probably work well for the use case
described...
Stephen
Attachment
On lör, 2010-06-12 at 09:10 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > > On lör, 2010-06-12 at 11:18 +0200, John Gage wrote: > >> A one file html version would be a godsend. > > > I've committed a build target for that now. Use 'make postgres.html' in > > doc/src/sgml/. > > Huh, is that actually worth anything? How many browsers will open it > without crashing, or will navigate the page with decent performance > if they do manage to open it? Text output is generated by going through HTML. I haven't figured out the best way to do the second step yet. We use lynx for INSTALL and HISTORY, but the results for this big file aren't very clean. Browsers seem to handle the file OK, btw.
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On l?r, 2010-06-12 at 09:10 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > > On l?r, 2010-06-12 at 11:18 +0200, John Gage wrote:
> > >> A one file html version would be a godsend.
> >
> > > I've committed a build target for that now. Use 'make postgres.html' in
> > > doc/src/sgml/.
> >
> > Huh, is that actually worth anything? How many browsers will open it
> > without crashing, or will navigate the page with decent performance
> > if they do manage to open it?
>
> Text output is generated by going through HTML. I haven't figured out
> the best way to do the second step yet. We use lynx for INSTALL and
> HISTORY, but the results for this big file aren't very clean.
>
> Browsers seem to handle the file OK, btw.
Well, I tried lynx and the output looked fine to me, so I applied the
attached patch to allow single-page text output. You can see the HTML
and text file results here:
http://momjian.us/expire/
The new rule name is postgres.txt. The file size are:
7,789,730 postgres.html
5,155,672 postgres.txt
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +
Index: doc/src/sgml/Makefile
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.145
diff -c -c -r1.145 Makefile
*** doc/src/sgml/Makefile 12 Jun 2010 15:42:44 -0000 1.145
--- doc/src/sgml/Makefile 12 Jun 2010 15:57:31 -0000
***************
*** 108,113 ****
--- 108,117 ----
postgres.html: postgres.sgml $(ALLSGML) stylesheet.dsl
$(JADE.html.call) -V nochunks -V rootchunk -V '(define %root-filename% #f)' -V '(define use-output-dir #f)' -i
include-index$<
+ # single-page text
+ postgres.txt: postgres.html
+ $(LYNX) -force_html -dump -nolist -stdin $< > $@
+
HTML.index: postgres.sgml $(ALMOSTALLSGML) stylesheet.dsl
@$(MKDIR_P) html
$(JADE.html.call) -V html-index $<
UFB! This was definitely worth the visit from the Nebula.
Thanks very, very much.
Sensational.
Thanks again,
John Gage
On Jun 12, 2010, at 6:01 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
http://momjian.us/expire/
The new rule name is postgres.txt. The file size are:
7,789,730 postgres.html
5,155,672 postgres.txt
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
John Gage wrote: > UFB! This was definitely worth the visit from the Nebula. > > Thanks very, very much. > > Sensational. > > Thanks again, > > John Gage We still have to decide how to make these accessible from our web site. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + None of us is going to be here forever. +
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> [...]
> + # single-page text
> + postgres.txt: postgres.html
> + $(LYNX) -force_html -dump -nolist -stdin $< > $@
^^^^^^
> +
> [...]
Isn't that unnecessary/wrong as the filename is supplied on
the command line?
Tim
Tim Landscheidt wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > > [...] > > + # single-page text > > + postgres.txt: postgres.html > > + $(LYNX) -force_html -dump -nolist -stdin $< > $@ > ^^^^^^ > > + > > [...] > > Isn't that unnecessary/wrong as the filename is supplied on > the command line? Ah, good catch. I wasn't able to test that because my lynx version doesn't support -stdin. Thanks, and updated. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + None of us is going to be here forever. +
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us (Tom Lane) writes: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >> On lör, 2010-06-12 at 11:18 +0200, John Gage wrote: >>> A one file html version would be a godsend. > >> I've committed a build target for that now. Use 'make postgres.html' in >> doc/src/sgml/. > > Huh, is that actually worth anything? How many browsers will open it > without crashing, or will navigate the page with decent performance > if they do manage to open it? > > (Not that I object to providing this Make target. But I thought the > discussion was about plain-text output.) I expect that having one HTML file would make it reasonably easy to use lynx/links/w3m [some text-based HTML browser] to transform HTML into plain text. I should think that it would also enable using analagous tools to transform HTML into eBook formats like ePub and mobi, which are the frequently-preferable-formats on the emerging category of "electronic book" appliances. I have browsed the CHM form of the docs using a CHM reader on my phone, and found that less than wonderful, which had a lot to do with the reader not being particularly great. A format that plays well with a decent reader may turn out pretty happily. -- select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'cbbrowne.com'; http://cbbrowne.com/info/internet.html "MS apparently now has a team dedicated to tracking problems with Linux and publicizing them. I guess eventually they'll figure out this back fires... ;)" -- William Burrow <aa126@DELETE.fan.nb.ca>