generator slides review and Python doc (+/- text bug)

[Terry Reedy]

I agree that responding to Jim's generalized statements such as
'useless' are either sincere personal opinions that are true with
respect to himself, delusional statements that are false with respect to
the community at large, or intentionally false trolls. I really cannot
tell. In any case, I agree that response is pretty useless.

Please ignore garbled post as I hit send in mid composition while revising.

 

[Chris Angelico]

PS. I agree that the pilcrow appearing and disappearing is not pretty when I
am not looking to use it. I happen to think that is it tolerable because it
is sometimes useful.

Yes, it's not perfect. But neither are the obvious alternatives:

* Keeping the symbol there permanently looks weird, and also raises
the question of whether or not it should be copied to the clipboard if
you select a whole pile of content. (If it is, you get an ugly bit of
junk in your text, something that now (being unclickable) has no
meaning. If it isn't, why isn't it? It's clearly part of the text!)

* Making the whole heading clickable is a bit weird in terms of UI. It
makes this text a link to itself, where it looks like it could be a
link to somewhere else. I've seen other sites where headings are all
links back to their ToC entries (ie the top of the page, or close to),
which is also weird, and the fact that it could be either means that
people won't know they can click on the heading to get a link to that
section.

* Having nothing on the section itself does work, but it means that
finding a section link requires you to go back up to the top of the
page, figure out which Contents entry is the section you want, and
click on it. That's how I get section links from a MediaWiki site (eg
Wikipedia); yes, it's workable, but it would be nicer to have the link
down at the section I'm reading.

* Putting a fixed-position piece of text showing the current section
is way too intrusive. I've seen sites with that, and I'm sure it's
useful, but I'd really prefer something a lot more subtle.

All of the above are plausible, but none is perfect. So what do you
do? You go with something imperfect and cope with a few issues.

ChrisA

 

[wxjmfauth]

Le mercredi 5 février 2014 00:18:35 UTC+1, Terry Reedy a écrit :

Jim, when you say 'useless', please qualify as 'useless to me'.

Otherwise, people may think that you mean 'useless to eveyone', and it

is disrespectful to mislead people that way. I hope you are aware that

your personal ideas of usefulness to yourself are quite different from

other peoples' ideas of usefulness to themselves.



I now understand that you consider the FSR useless *to you* because you

do not care about the bugginess of narrow builds or about the spacious

of wide builds. You do care about uniformity of character size across

all strings, and FSR lacks that. You are entitled to make that judgment

for yourself. You are not entitled to sabotage others by projecting you

personal judgments onto others. The FSR and pilcrow are definitely

useful to other people as they judge personal usefulness for themselves.



PS. I agree that the pilcrow appearing and disappearing is not pretty

when I am not looking to use it. I happen to think that is it tolerable

because it is sometimes useful.

I do not contest the utility of such a feature.

I do not see the utility of such a feature, when
visiting the Python doc on line. That's all.
I lived years without knowing that one could
click on a "pilcrow"!

---

If you put the FSR on the table.
I think I have a very correct vision of what Unicode
should be and *is*. (*)
I belong to those who know that latin-1 is unusable for
more than ten European languages based on latin scripts.
Today, one can add German to these.
No offense, you are still stuck and living in
the ascii world. (The recent byte string discussion
was very informative on that subject).

Writing that the FSR does not suit my needs seems to me
a little bit exagerated. You should have more concerns
about something like "ReportLab" than about my (jmf) software.

(*) Luckily, that's already the case for the users using
serious tools.

jmf

 

[Ned Batchelder]

If you put the FSR on the table.
I think I have a very correct vision of what Unicode
should be and*is*. (*)
I belong to those who know that latin-1 is unusable for
more than ten European languages based on latin scripts.
Today, one can add German to these.
No offense, you are still stuck and living in
the ascii world. (The recent byte string discussion
was very informative on that subject).

Writing that the FSR does not suit my needs seems to me
a little bit exagerated. You should have more concerns
about something like "ReportLab" than about my (jmf) software.

(*) Luckily, that's already the case for the users using
serious tools.

We've been over this too many times already, and we won't be discussing
it with you again.

 

[Mark Lawrence]

On 05/02/2014 14:41, (e-mail address removed) wrote:

Please stop sending double line spaced messages, just follow the
instructions here https://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleGroupsPython to
prevent this happening, thanks.

 

[wxjmfauth]

Le mercredi 5 février 2014 16:23:01 UTC+1, Ned Batchelder a écrit :

We've been over this too many times already, and we won't be discussing

it with you again.

I agree.
(but I was a little bit provocated)

jmf

 

[Rustom Mody]

Useless and really ugly.

Evidently one can do worse:

http://www.pip-installer.org/en/latest/installing.html#requirements

 

[wxjmfauth]

Le jeudi 6 février 2014 13:23:03 UTC+1, Rustom Mody a écrit :

Evidently one can do worse:



http://www.pip-installer.org/en/latest/installing.html#requirements

or http://cx-freeze.readthedocs.org/en/latest/index.html

 

[Chris Angelico]

Evidently one can do worse:

http://www.pip-installer.org/en/latest/installing.html#requirements

Aside from using a little "chain link" icon rather than a
typographer's symbol, that looks exactly the same. How's it worse?

ChrisA

 

[Robert Kern]

Aside from using a little "chain link" icon rather than a
typographer's symbol, that looks exactly the same. How's it worse?

When I looked at it earlier today, I got a default "cannot find this glyph" box
instead of the chain icon. I assumed that is what Rustom was referring to. It's
working for me now.

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco

 

[Rustom Mody]

When I looked at it earlier today, I got a default "cannot find this glyph" box
instead of the chain icon. I assumed that is what Rustom was referring to.
It's working for me now.

Yes I was getting unicode number-boxes; which is now working