The results from our platform survey are in and counted! The volume was
higher than expected, and we thank those who took the time to fill out the
survey. The results of the survey distinguish three platform choices above
the rest. Amiga OS 4.0/AmigaOne PPC, Mac OSX, and Linux i86 being the heads
above the rest. Here is a loose review of these three platforms and how
development will be handled.

The text mentions my current development commitments. The main one is
documentation. I've reviewed much of what was written for 4.1, and it is
just plain wrong! One of the main discussions we here at Grasshopper have
had is how to deliver solid content for our users at the lowest price. To
that end, I am going to begin updating the web site to "open up" the
development of PageStream documentation. I can provide the details of how
things work, I just need help turning that into something the average user
can digest. If anyone is interested in contributing to this "open
documentation" cause, they should contact me at support@grasshopperllc.com.
Those that contribute in significant ways will be acknowledge in the
program and documentation, as well as receive free software (plus sneak
peeks at upcoming software). The rest of the users will benefit from better
(and hopefully more timely!) documentation, and a lower cost of ownership!

My second project is wrapping up new translation tools which will help
provide localized versions of PageStream quickly with a reduction (and
hopefully ellimination) of repetitive work on the translators part. The new
resource tool will also help in our move to dynamic dialog box/requester
that adapt to user font and size choices, and will first be seen in the
upcoming Linux release. I expect the other platforms to jump in line
shortly after that.

My third and final project is stomping out the last of those pesky Windows
bugs. While 99% of our users are busy away using PageStream for Windows,
there are still a handful of users reporting problems. A new release should
be coming "soon".

A special thanks to all those who contributed to this PageStream Platform
Survey. Your time is valuable, and we appreciate you spending a little bit
of it with us! We should have a new survey up later this month asking for
your input in future features for PageStream. No future development (other
than the usual bits and pieces that I am always working on) is currently
underway, so no new version is in sight, but we are tossing around the idea
of implementing the top (reasonable!) feature in 4.1 at no charge. How's
that for incentive to respond! Stay tuned for more details!

Thanks for your support,

- Deron

Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Linux i86 - Wow, talk about a double-edged sword! No real competition in
the Linux world, but on the other hand, everything is free! The question
remains if enough customers will pay for real software. There is certainly
enough initial interest, the rest is a gamble. Many hours have already been
spent trying to plot a plan for Linux! PageStream development for Linux has
already begun, and we expect a few screen shots along the way. While other
processors may be supported in the future, i86 will be the initial target.
So far, it appears that PageStream will be using the GTK+/Gnome libraries.
We should have a more clear development road map in the next few weeks. The
version is currently being developed out of house, which is a mixed bag.
Hopefully it will more succesful than SoftLogik's experience with outside
Windows development. Deron will be keeping a close eye on this one because
it will be of direct benefit to him for the Mac OSX development.

Mac OSX - While the PageStream Mac market has never been as strong as
Windows, it has certainly stirred a lot of folks into a frenzy with this
major new OS. It has the nearly same excitement that was once felt in the
Amiga market (and in the initial Mac market as well). Deron Kazmaier will
take the lead on development of this version once his current development
commitments are met. It is hoped that other individuals will step in as
well, but nothing has been signed at this point. One thing we are seriously
considering is dropping support for the classic Mac OS. This won't be
immediate, but our surveys (and prior feedback) indicates that the
PageStream users still using classic Mac OS are doing so _just_ to continue
to use PageStream and prefer to run OS X.

Amiga OS 4.0/AmigaOne PPC - Development for this "platform" has two
interesting twists to it. First, PageStream Amiga should run in emulation
mode on this system, so Amiga customers can leverage their existing version
of PageStream. Second, customers don't actually have this "platform" yet,
so while there is probably going to be a decent installed base, there is of
course currently no existing installed base of customers! All that being
said, if Amiga OS 4.0 and AmigaOne PPC is released in a form similar to
what is being talked about, and a reasonable number of our customers get
the "platform", we will be developing a new version of PageStream which is
compiled natively on the PPC, and will use what OS 4.0 functionality is
deemed appropriate for PageStream. We also expect to make an i86 version of
PageStream for Amithlon as well. The costs to develop these versions and
the perceived demand will determine if they are bundled with the "classic"
Amiga version of PageStream, or sold seperately. Most likely this
development will be done by Deron Kazmaier, as he is the most involved
these days with the Amiga libraries. Luckily for him, this development
can't begin until the new OS is released, since he has enough to keep him
busy right now.

Other platforms...
While several votes were cast for BeOS, Atari/Magic, RiscOS/Acorn, BSD, and
Linux PPC, the interest is just not high enough to warrant development at
this time. However, we will continue to keep our eye on these and other
directions for the future. The possibility also exists for outside, even
open source, development of the libraries needed by PageStream to run on
these platforms. We will not be making PageStream itself available open
source, but would make the product available at a lower cost on those
platforms. Something to think about for the future, both here at the home
of PageStream, and in the relevant communities. If someone is interested in
talking about such a possibility, please email our lead programmer, Deron
Kazmaier, at support@grasshopperllc.com to further discuss such possibilities.

>
>
>Mac OSX - While the PageStream Mac market has never been as strong as
>Windows, it has certainly stirred a lot of folks into a frenzy with this
>major new OS. It has the nearly same excitement that was once felt in the
>Amiga market (and in the initial Mac market as well). Deron Kazmaier will
>take the lead on development of this version once his current development
>commitments are met. It is hoped that other individuals will step in as
>well, but nothing has been signed at this point. One thing we are seriously
>considering is dropping support for the classic Mac OS. This won't be
>immediate, but our surveys (and prior feedback) indicates that the
>PageStream users still using classic Mac OS are doing so _just_ to continue
>to use PageStream and prefer to run OS X.
>

currently, pagestream is the only app I use under classic, so I
welcome this outcome.
apple is dropping os 9 support very fast so osx is realy the way to go.

any idea when this version will see the surface/my desktop (when are
his current development commitments met)?

thanks and good luck with development.

best regards
eddie d
--
=================================
eddie d
for all your media-art

http://www.eddied.nu
=================================

>any idea when this version will see the surface/my desktop (when are
>his current development commitments met)?

Sorry, I can't answer that just yet. Give me a few weeks to catch my breath!

>thanks and good luck with development.
>
>best regards
>eddie d

Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows

Deron,

Development plans for selected platforms seems about right - the
wonders of a survey.

While I look forward to the OS X version of PGS is there likelyto be
an update for Classic?

As yet there has not been a 4.1.4.0 release (though the web site still
promises it for June) - has it been suspended with the move direct to
OS X?

Looking forward to the next installment of news.

Regards,

--

Nigel

e-mail: nigel@richman.u-net.com

<support@grasshopperllc.com> wrote at Tue, 17 Sep 2002 19:30:27 -0500
about <[PageStreamSupport] PageStream Platform Survey Results>:

[...]
> The new
> resource tool will also help in our move to dynamic dialog box/requester
> that adapt to user font and size choices, and will first be seen in the
> upcoming Linux release. I expect the other platforms to jump in line
> shortly after that.

dos this meas the complete gui? also the main window and toolbar?
afaik all the graphics used inside the toolboxes are a little bit too
small and should be replaceable, actually. e.g. mr. martin merz
(masonicons) has done a great job in replacing toolbar-icons in other
programs. and they are usually a little bit more colorful

byebye...

--
Michael Merkel (MiMe@IRC)
Michael.Merkel@gmx.net
http://home.t-online.de/home/Merkel.Michael/

I hope so because the current Mac version is not stable enough for me to
use so I went back to 4.0. But I do have a couple of PCI cards in this
800MHz dp G4, and one of them may be a cause of the instability so I'm just
biding my time until the next 4.1 patch comes out.

I've been using Pagestream since the very early days of v3, and there have
been times when I've had to be patient, but in the end I love the program.

Greg
-----
"What's the ugliest part of your body? What's the ugliest part of your
body? Some say your nose Some say your toes but I think it's YOUR MIND."

"All your children are poor unfortunate victims of lies you believe. A
plague upon your ignorance that keeps the young from the truth they
deserve..."

Frank Zappa (196

--On Wednesday, September 18, 2002 8:18 PM +0100 Nigel Richman
<nigel@richman.u-net.com> wrote:

> Deron,
>
> Development plans for selected platforms seems about right - the
> wonders of a survey.
>
> While I look forward to the OS X version of PGS is there likelyto be
> an update for Classic?
>
> As yet there has not been a 4.1.4.0 release (though the web site still
> promises it for June) - has it been suspended with the move direct to
> OS X?
>
> Looking forward to the next installment of news.
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Nigel
>
> e-mail: nigel@richman.u-net.com
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> PageStreamSupport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

>Development plans for selected platforms seems about right - the
>wonders of a survey.

I had an idea how it would turn out. However, there were some surprises.
The number of folks indicating they were going to get the AmigaOne was
higher than I expected (of course, we still have a very active Amiga
PageStream market so it is not totally unexpected, but I thought Amithlon
and the Intel would be the favored direction). I was also surprised with
the number of Atari Magic requests! They are still hanging in there. Most
were from Germany (the largest Atari market), and many were Calamus users
(for those who don't know, it is a DTP program as well), but still surprising.

I was surprised on the low BeOS response. Through the last few years I've
received what _seems_ like as many BeOS requests as Linux requests.

>While I look forward to the OS X version of PGS is there likelyto be
>an update for Classic?

Yes, if I can ever figure out why the new version crashes all the time.
Nothing major changed, yet the program has become totally unglued. I've
spent many day long debugging sessions. Hmm. I wonder if I should reinstall
my developer tools...

>Looking forward to the next installment of news.
>
>Regards,
>Nigel
>
>e-mail: nigel@richman.u-net.com

Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows

>[...]
> > The new
> > resource tool will also help in our move to dynamic dialog box/requester
> > that adapt to user font and size choices, and will first be seen in the
> > upcoming Linux release. I expect the other platforms to jump in line
> > shortly after that.
>
>dos this meas the complete gui? also the main window and toolbar?
>afaik all the graphics used inside the toolboxes are a little bit too
>small and should be replaceable, actually. e.g. mr. martin merz
>(masonicons) has done a great job in replacing toolbar-icons in other
>programs. and they are usually a little bit more colorful

Yes, icons as well.

>Michael Merkel (MiMe@IRC)
>Michael.Merkel@gmx.net
><http://home.t-online.de/home/Merkel.Michael/>http://home.t-online.de/home/Merkel.Michael/

Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows

On 9/18/02 7:09 PM, "Grasshopper Support" <support@grasshopperllc.com>
wrote:

>
>> Development plans for selected platforms seems about right - the
>> wonders of a survey.
>
> I had an idea how it would turn out. However, there were some surprises.
> The number of folks indicating they were going to get the AmigaOne was
> higher than I expected (of course, we still have a very active Amiga
> PageStream market so it is not totally unexpected, but I thought Amithlon
> and the Intel would be the favored direction). I was also surprised with
> the number of Atari Magic requests! They are still hanging in there. Most
> were from Germany (the largest Atari market), and many were Calamus users
> (for those who don't know, it is a DTP program as well), but still surprising.
>
> I was surprised on the low BeOS response. Through the last few years I've
> received what _seems_ like as many BeOS requests as Linux requests.
>
>> While I look forward to the OS X version of PGS is there likelyto be
>> an update for Classic?
>
> Yes, if I can ever figure out why the new version crashes all the time.
> Nothing major changed, yet the program has become totally unglued. I've
> spent many day long debugging sessions. Hmm. I wonder if I should reinstall
> my developer tools...
>
>> Looking forward to the next installment of news.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nigel
>>
>> e-mail: nigel@richman.u-net.com
>
>
> Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
> Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
> PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> PageStreamSupport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
I haven't had any major problems with pagestream mac 4.134 crashing on my
imac g3 400mhz using os 9.1 and 384 meg ram. I do set the ram settings high
(maybe 256 meg). I have also not had any crashing problems with my new imac
g4 800 mhz 1 gig ram running in classic 9.2 under 10.2
Matthew

<support@grasshopperllc.com> wrote at Wed, 18 Sep 2002 18:09:48 -0500
about <[PageStreamSupport] Re: PageStream Platform Survey Results>:

>
> >Development plans for selected platforms seems about right - the
> >wonders of a survey.
>
> I had an idea how it would turn out. However, there were some surprises.
> The number of folks indicating they were going to get the AmigaOne was
> higher than I expected

well, finally getting a "new" hardware which all amigans have expected
and are waiting for about 8 years now is not so surprising, imho.

> (of course, we still have a very active Amiga
> PageStream market so it is not totally unexpected, but I thought Amithlon
> and the Intel would be the favored direction).

i believe "real" amigans want to see a future for their hardware and
software. of course using an intel pc in combination with amithlon is
a good hardware choice (especially cheap!) and most users already have
such a beast at home but you have to consider that you will stick with
os3.9 at best then. no further amiga os development will happen on
these machines. so i believe they are just "for fun" and to get a
speedy feeling... the future will be amigaos4 and for some users maybe
also morphos.

> I was also surprised with
> the number of Atari Magic requests! They are still hanging in there. Most
> were from Germany (the largest Atari market), and many were Calamus users
> (for those who don't know, it is a DTP program as well), but still surprising.

well, they simply knoe the quality of pagestream i believe

looking forward to an os4 version!

byebye...

--
Michael Merkel (MiMe@IRC)
Michael.Merkel@gmx.net
http://home.t-online.de/home/Merkel.Michael/

G'day Michael Merkel,

On 20-Sep-02, on the subject of "Re: [PageStreamSupport] Re: PageStream
Platform Survey Results", you spoke thus:

> well, finally getting a "new" hardware which all amigans have expected
> and are waiting for about 8 years now is not so surprising, imho.
>

...and the first batch are shipping to developers as we speak.

> i believe "real" amigans want to see a future for their hardware and
> software. of course using an intel pc in combination with amithlon is
> a good hardware choice (especially cheap!) and most users already have

Especially those that need laptop portability.

--
Steve Bowman - Sydney, Australia

It was the dawn of the Third Age of Mankind.

On Thu, 19 Sep 2002 18:50:25 -0400 waltonmatthew@adelphia.net wrote about Re: [PageStreamSupport] Re: PageStream Platform Survey Results:
> I haven't had any major problems with pagestream mac 4.134 crashing on my
> imac g3 400mhz using os 9.1 and 384 meg ram. I do set the ram settings high
> (maybe 256 meg). I have also not had any crashing problems with my new imac
> g4 800 mhz 1 gig ram running in classic 9.2 under 10.2
> Matthew
>
Deron (&Matthew)

On the occasions when I have been using the Mac version (4.1.3.4) on
my wife's iMac (OS X 10.1.5 & OS 9.2.2) I have not experineced major
crashes. A few glitches (I can't remember the details of) and some
problems with my HP DJ printer - it takes two goes to get it to print
then it does most of two copies. It is also rather sensitive to the
ink levels in the printer (cf OS X driver) but this may be the HP
driver rather than Pagestream.

Still, OS X native will be a dream come true.

Regards,

--

Nigel

e-mail: nigel@richman.u-net.com

Hello, and welcome to my first post on this list! If you are one of those
who had emailed me earlier about helping with this "project" then you got
added to this mailing list. You are of course welcome to unsubscribe if you
wish!

One user (Chris Elliott), has been the first to offer a suggestion as to
the initial organization. He got me thinking about this. (Chris, don't be
mad at me for posting this publicly!)

This is my thought on the organization. I think working in PageStream
documents may actually put to much up front emphasis on the formatting, and
less on the content. We would have to break the PageStream document into
dozens (or hundreds) of individual documents to allow different folks to
work on different parts. Also, what may be in a printed manual may be less
than the total PageStream knowledge (for example, scripting commands).

What if instead, documentation was initially created in simple HTML? It is
high enough of a formatting to allow things like bold and italics, it can
embed pictures, and it can be linked to other relevant sections. With some
kind of master list of the order of the files from first to last with
breaks for new chapters, it would be possible for me to then create a
script or code that would stitch them together into a PageStream document.
HTML doesn't currently support embedded pictures, but could easily enough
be made to do so.

The only difficult part of the printed manual that is not found in the
online docs is the sidebars. I suppose simple tables could take care of
that? Another table at the bottom for navigation to next/prev sections,
back to the TOC, and other similar sections would be possible to "cut out"
later.

Of course, the next question is do we start with the current printed manual
and create this, or start with the online help? The online help currently
includes more information than the printed manual, but I'm not sure if it
contains everything in the printed manual.

Anyway, these are just some ideas that came to mind to help get the
conversation going.

>GS> development of PageStream documentation. I can provide the details of how
>GS> things work, I just need help turning that into something the average
>user
>
>Another thing I would suggest is supply a PGS template file (with the
>character and paragraph styles to be used) and a style guide (possibly
>with a sample page or three) so the contributers can write and format
>it in the native PGS format that the manual is written in. This should
>do a couple of things... First: real-time bug fix any inconsistancies
>with cross-platform sharing of PGS files. Second: should (hopefully)
>reduce the editing time to make sure all contributions look and feel
>the same when they are all stitched together.
>
>GS> can digest. If anyone is interested in contributing to this "open
>GS> documentation" cause, they should contact me at
>support@grasshopperllc.com.
>
>I'm quite interested. My experience in technical writing so far is
>.readme files for scripts that I've written, commented code within
>those scripts, and electro-mechanical assembly instructions. (Just so
>you know where I'm coming from...
>
>GS> Those that contribute in significant ways will be acknowledge in the
>GS> program and documentation, as well as receive free software (plus sneak
>GS> peeks at upcoming software). The rest of the users will benefit from
>better
>GS> (and hopefully more timely!) documentation, and a lower cost of ownership!
>
>My priorities on your suggested compensation are, First: helping
>others get the most they can out of this package. Second:
>acknowledgement for my work in the docs and program. (A far distant)
>Third: the free software. I'm not in it for the material gains, just
>the emotional and reputation gains. (No wonder I've never tried to
>make money coding scripts as shareware...) Oh, and I'll learn more
>about specific parts of the program as I write the documentation and
>play with the features to make sure the documentation makes sense.
>
>[...]
>
>GS> Thanks for your support,
>
>GS> - Deron
>
>Thanks for your hard work and effort on an excellent DTP package. I
>hope that my efforts can help in any way.
>
>Pax
>--
> Member: Team AMIGA --} WatchDog
>Fingerprint: 2C 8A 03 3C D6 D3 32 7F (Chris Elliott)
> 66 0F 9B 9F 03 77 1D 85 PGP Key ID: A6A79259
>Keys (and other stuff) are athttp://www.crosswinds.net/~sembazuru
><tsb>Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.

Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows

I have no idea what others use for web-authoring. I make use of
Dreamweaver/HomeSite & TextPad for my department's site. HTML templates
are very handy for this. Since, however, not everyone is even going to
want to use one program, possibly a boilerplate of the relevant HTML
code could be made available to everyone working on this project. This
boilerplate document would allow everyone to work with the same basic
HTML page layout & format & since it'd be simple HTML, they could use
whatever tools they liked to to work on the code itself. Is there some
sort of file repository that this Yahoo! group could use for stashing in
work dox?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Geoffrey Webb
IT, Textbook & Facility Coordinator
UW - Madison
Dept. of Spanish & Portuguese
1018 Van Hise Hall, 1220 Linden Drive
Madison WI 53706-1557
mailto:gwebb@wisc.edu -+- phone: (60 263-0610

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grasshopper Support [mailto:support@grasshopperllc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 1:49 PM
> To: pagestreamdocs@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [PageStreamDocs] Welcome to the PageStream Document Project
>
>
> Hello, and welcome to my first post on this list! If you are one of
those
> who had emailed me earlier about helping with this "project" then you
got
> added to this mailing list. You are of course welcome to unsubscribe
if
> you
> wish!
>
> One user (Chris Elliott), has been the first to offer a suggestion as
to
> the initial organization. He got me thinking about this. (Chris, don't
be
> mad at me for posting this publicly!)
>
> This is my thought on the organization. I think working in PageStream
> documents may actually put to much up front emphasis on the
formatting,
> and
> less on the content. We would have to break the PageStream document
into
> dozens (or hundreds) of individual documents to allow different folks
to
> work on different parts. Also, what may be in a printed manual may be
less
> than the total PageStream knowledge (for example, scripting commands).
>
> What if instead, documentation was initially created in simple HTML?
It is
> high enough of a formatting to allow things like bold and italics, it
can
> embed pictures, and it can be linked to other relevant sections. With
some
> kind of master list of the order of the files from first to last with
> breaks for new chapters, it would be possible for me to then create a
> script or code that would stitch them together into a PageStream
document.
> HTML doesn't currently support embedded pictures, but could easily
enough
> be made to do so.
>
> The only difficult part of the printed manual that is not found in the
> online docs is the sidebars. I suppose simple tables could take care
of
> that? Another table at the bottom for navigation to next/prev
sections,
> back to the TOC, and other similar sections would be possible to "cut
out"
> later.
>
> Of course, the next question is do we start with the current printed
> manual
> and create this, or start with the online help? The online help
currently
> includes more information than the printed manual, but I'm not sure if
it
> contains everything in the printed manual.
>
> Anyway, these are just some ideas that came to mind to help get the
> conversation going.
>
> >GS> development of PageStream documentation. I can provide the
details of
> how
> >GS> things work, I just need help turning that into something the
average
> >user
> >
> >Another thing I would suggest is supply a PGS template file (with
the
> >character and paragraph styles to be used) and a style guide
(possibly
> >with a sample page or three) so the contributers can write and
format
> >it in the native PGS format that the manual is written in. This
should
> >do a couple of things... First: real-time bug fix any
inconsistancies
> >with cross-platform sharing of PGS files. Second: should
(hopefully)
> >reduce the editing time to make sure all contributions look and
feel
> >the same when they are all stitched together.
> >
> >GS> can digest. If anyone is interested in contributing to this "open
> >GS> documentation" cause, they should contact me at
> >support@grasshopperllc.com.
> >
> >I'm quite interested. My experience in technical writing so far
is
> >.readme files for scripts that I've written, commented code
within
> >those scripts, and electro-mechanical assembly instructions. (Just
so
> >you know where I'm coming from...
> >
> >GS> Those that contribute in significant ways will be acknowledge in
the
> >GS> program and documentation, as well as receive free software (plus
> sneak
> >GS> peeks at upcoming software). The rest of the users will benefit
from
> >better
> >GS> (and hopefully more timely!) documentation, and a lower cost of
> ownership!
> >
> >My priorities on your suggested compensation are, First:
helping
> >others get the most they can out of this package.
Second:
> >acknowledgement for my work in the docs and program. (A far
distant)
> >Third: the free software. I'm not in it for the material gains,
just
> >the emotional and reputation gains. (No wonder I've never tried
to
> >make money coding scripts as shareware...) Oh, and I'll learn
more
> >about specific parts of the program as I write the documentation
and
> >play with the features to make sure the documentation makes sense.

> >
> >[...]
> >
> >GS> Thanks for your support,
> >
> >GS> - Deron
> >
> >Thanks for your hard work and effort on an excellent DTP package.
I
> >hope that my efforts can help in any way.
> >
> >Pax
> >--
> > Member: Team AMIGA --} WatchDog
> >Fingerprint: 2C 8A 03 3C D6 D3 32 7F (Chris Elliott)
> > 66 0F 9B 9F 03 77 1D 85 PGP Key ID: A6A79259
> >Keys (and other stuff) are athttp://www.crosswinds.net/~sembazuru
> ><tsb>Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.
>
>
> Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
> Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
> PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> PageStreamDocs-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Yes, we will be able to share files. Either from yahoo, or the
grasshopperllc web site.

So is the concept of doing it up in HTML first seem the best way? If
someone has a better idea, or a reason why this wouldn't work, or would be
more difficult than another, I'm interested!

I think the first thing I will do is create the script that will build the
PageStream document. That would pretty much prove if it can work that way
or not.

>I have no idea what others use for web-authoring. I make use of
>Dreamweaver/HomeSite & TextPad for my department's site. HTML templates
>are very handy for this. Since, however, not everyone is even going to
>want to use one program, possibly a boilerplate of the relevant HTML
>code could be made available to everyone working on this project. This
>boilerplate document would allow everyone to work with the same basic
>HTML page layout & format & since it'd be simple HTML, they could use
>whatever tools they liked to to work on the code itself. Is there some
>sort of file repository that this Yahoo! group could use for stashing in
>work dox?
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Geoffrey Webb
>IT, Textbook & Facility Coordinator
>UW - Madison
>Dept. of Spanish & Portuguese
>1018 Van Hise Hall, 1220 Linden Drive
>Madison WI 53706-1557
>mailto:gwebb@wisc.edu -+- phone: (60 263-0610
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Grasshopper Support [mailto:support@grasshopperllc.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 1:49 PM
> > To: pagestreamdocs@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [PageStreamDocs] Welcome to the PageStream Document Project
> >
> >
> > Hello, and welcome to my first post on this list! If you are one of
>those
> > who had emailed me earlier about helping with this "project" then you
>got
> > added to this mailing list. You are of course welcome to unsubscribe
>if
> > you
> > wish!
> >
> > One user (Chris Elliott), has been the first to offer a suggestion as
>to
> > the initial organization. He got me thinking about this. (Chris, don't
>be
> > mad at me for posting this publicly!)
> >
> > This is my thought on the organization. I think working in PageStream
> > documents may actually put to much up front emphasis on the
>formatting,
> > and
> > less on the content. We would have to break the PageStream document
>into
> > dozens (or hundreds) of individual documents to allow different folks
>to
> > work on different parts. Also, what may be in a printed manual may be
>less
> > than the total PageStream knowledge (for example, scripting commands).
> >
> > What if instead, documentation was initially created in simple HTML?
>It is
> > high enough of a formatting to allow things like bold and italics, it
>can
> > embed pictures, and it can be linked to other relevant sections. With
>some
> > kind of master list of the order of the files from first to last with
> > breaks for new chapters, it would be possible for me to then create a
> > script or code that would stitch them together into a PageStream
>document.
> > HTML doesn't currently support embedded pictures, but could easily
>enough
> > be made to do so.
> >
> > The only difficult part of the printed manual that is not found in the
> > online docs is the sidebars. I suppose simple tables could take care
>of
> > that? Another table at the bottom for navigation to next/prev
>sections,
> > back to the TOC, and other similar sections would be possible to "cut
>out"
> > later.
> >
> > Of course, the next question is do we start with the current printed
> > manual
> > and create this, or start with the online help? The online help
>currently
> > includes more information than the printed manual, but I'm not sure if
>it
> > contains everything in the printed manual.
> >
> > Anyway, these are just some ideas that came to mind to help get the
> > conversation going.
> >
> > >GS> development of PageStream documentation. I can provide the
>details of
> > how
> > >GS> things work, I just need help turning that into something the
>average
> > >user
> > >
> > >Another thing I would suggest is supply a PGS template file (with
>the
> > >character and paragraph styles to be used) and a style guide
>(possibly
> > >with a sample page or three) so the contributers can write and
>format
> > >it in the native PGS format that the manual is written in. This
>should
> > >do a couple of things... First: real-time bug fix any
>inconsistancies
> > >with cross-platform sharing of PGS files. Second: should
>(hopefully)
> > >reduce the editing time to make sure all contributions look and
>feel
> > >the same when they are all stitched together.
> > >
> > >GS> can digest. If anyone is interested in contributing to this "open
> > >GS> documentation" cause, they should contact me at
> > >support@grasshopperllc.com.
> > >
> > >I'm quite interested. My experience in technical writing so far
>is
> > >.readme files for scripts that I've written, commented code
>within
> > >those scripts, and electro-mechanical assembly instructions. (Just
>so
> > >you know where I'm coming from...
> > >
> > >GS> Those that contribute in significant ways will be acknowledge in
>the
> > >GS> program and documentation, as well as receive free software (plus
> > sneak
> > >GS> peeks at upcoming software). The rest of the users will benefit
>from
> > >better
> > >GS> (and hopefully more timely!) documentation, and a lower cost of
> > ownership!
> > >
> > >My priorities on your suggested compensation are, First:
>helping
> > >others get the most they can out of this package.
>Second:
> > >acknowledgement for my work in the docs and program. (A far
>distant)
> > >Third: the free software. I'm not in it for the material gains,
>just
> > >the emotional and reputation gains. (No wonder I've never tried
>to
> > >make money coding scripts as shareware...) Oh, and I'll learn
>more
> > >about specific parts of the program as I write the documentation
>and
> > >play with the features to make sure the documentation makes sense.
>
> > >
> > >[...]
> > >
> > >GS> Thanks for your support,
> > >
> > >GS> - Deron
> > >
> > >Thanks for your hard work and effort on an excellent DTP package.
>I
> > >hope that my efforts can help in any way.
> > >
> > >Pax
> > >--
> > > Member: Team AMIGA --} WatchDog
> > >Fingerprint: 2C 8A 03 3C D6 D3 32 7F (Chris Elliott)
> > > 66 0F 9B 9F 03 77 1D 85 PGP Key ID: A6A79259
> > >Keys (and other stuff) are at
> <http://www.crosswinds.net/~sembazuru>http://www.crosswinds.net/~sembazuru
> > ><tsb>Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.

Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows

--On Thursday, September 19, 2002 1:48 PM -0500 Grasshopper Support
<support@grasshopperllc.com> wrote:

> Of course, the next question is do we start with the current printed
> manual and create this, or start with the online help? The online help
> currently includes more information than the printed manual, but I'm not
> sure if it contains everything in the printed manual.

So the goal of this project is to create both online help, and a printed
manual for Pagestream 4.1, right?

It's clear that the pgs4manual.pdf file that's on the website is meant only
for printing out since it doesn't contain a table of contents or index. I
think to preserve our sanity we need to keep this effort in a format--like
html--where it's easy to find your way around the doc (unlike that .pdf
file) at all times.

Is it practical or desirable to design the html doc with a structure that
has a one-to-one correspondence with the manual? I mean, for example, to
make online page 26 identical to the manual's page 26? I know that this is
not normally the way online docs are designed, but if one of the goals is
to make a printed manual wouldn't this approach simplify the whole project?

Also, if the project worked this way it seems to me that the conversion of
the html into a Pagestream doc would be a lot easier. Playing out my
fantasy to the end I imagine that before the conversion, both a table of
contents and index could be created so the ease of moving around within the
new Pagestream doc is maintained. Naturally, after the conversion a number
of things (the devil being as always in the details) would have to be
changed, but at least all the elements would be on the correct page.

What do you think, does this approach fly? Does it "have wings"?

Greg

On 19-Sep-02, Grasshopper Support wrote:

> What if instead, documentation was initially created in simple HTML? It is >
high enough of a formatting to allow things like bold and italics, it can
> embed pictures, and it can be linked to other relevant sections. With some >
kind of master list of the order of the files from first to last with
> breaks for new chapters, it would be possible for me to then create a
> script or code that would stitch them together into a PageStream document.
> HTML doesn't currently support embedded pictures, but could easily enough
> be made to do so.

Do I understand from this that a /Save as HTML/ feature is coming up
(replacing the /Export Text/ - HTML) in PageStream that will allow
complete HTML formatting and embedding of graphics? In short, expand
this desktop publishing program into a web-page design program, much as the
late lamented Softwood folks were trying to do with their DTP program?

It's long been standard to provide a printed manual for video-oriented
programs, so a display-oriented manual for a DTP program may make some
sense. But until the tools are provided, how are we print-oriented users
supposed to create manual pages with sidebars, embedded graphics,
hypertext links and all that uptown stuff in HTML?

--Geoff

--
ggass@teleport.com Geoffrey A. Gass Foulecourt Press

>Do I understand from this that a /Save as HTML/ feature is coming up
>(replacing the /Export Text/ - HTML) in PageStream that will allow
>complete HTML formatting and embedding of graphics? In short, expand
>this desktop publishing program into a web-page design program, much as the
>late lamented Softwood folks were trying to do with their DTP program?

No, you don't understand that What I was simply proposing is adding
support for embedded pictures in the HTML import.

I realize you would like to be able to take a PageStream document and
publish it as is on the web, but the limitations of PageStream vs the
limitations of HTML are really in opposition to each other. For example,
HTML has a variable length page, PageStream does not. PageStream can place
graphics by coordinates, HTML can not. If you resize an HTML window, the
whole page adjusts. PageStream does not.

Web pages and word processors have a very similar approach to designing a
page. That would be a much easier cross over.

Of course, possibilities exist to do things in PageStream and then save
them in a web format with more layout possiblities than the current HTML
export allows. But this is not the place for what might be (especially that
far from where we are today!)

>It's long been standard to provide a printed manual for video-oriented
>programs, so a display-oriented manual for a DTP program may make some
>sense. But until the tools are provided, how are we print-oriented users
>supposed to create manual pages with sidebars, embedded graphics,
>hypertext links and all that uptown stuff in HTML?

I assume you know something about HTML, and how HTML works. Just think for
a moment about how PageStream layout works. You draw a box at x,y,w,h. If
you add text, the box stays there! Not true in HTML!

So how would you solve this problem? (Again, this is not about the manual
project, but I'll entertain it!)

>--Geoff
>ggass@teleport.com Geoffrey A. Gass Foulecourt Press

Deron Kazmaier - support@grasshopperllc.com
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.grasshopperllc.com
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Macintosh, and Windows