April 1 discussion with Christoph

http://observatory.constantvzw.org/tgsoguide_1803211855-CROP.pdf <<< latest pdf, from this weekend

Deadline edits: 6 April <<<< would you be ok with this CARLINSAYS
Dummy arrives in Augsburg + Brussels: 20 April
Last minor edits/checks (try to avoid author edits)

For now, amount of copies: 80-100 (first run of Conversations: 150)
re-order in batches of 20

> CH: My idea for the cover, or better the finishing of the book, which includes the cover. As a mockup: 

https://freeze.sh/_/2018/tgso/_/180311_mockup-inside_03.jpg
https://freeze.sh/_/2018/tgso/_/180311_mockup-inside_02.jpg
https://freeze.sh/_/2018/tgso/_/180311_mockup-cover.jpg

https://survival-mastery.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SAS-survival-guide-app.jpg

Paper: see 'Do not repeat yourself' publication

Maybe fill up pages with images last moment
Still looking for images from the elevator performance -- seems ok, video

attachments start with a portrait of the 'author' on the left



///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

--- Comments based on this pdf http://observatory.constantvzw.org/tgsoguide_1802081708-CROP.pdf ---

New markup for Carlin's comments

% CARLINSAYS: 

we'll need this for the final editing to appear in the pdf (but without changing text flow?!)

Should be feasible. (% CARLINSAYS: things to say)


Pagenumbers

Pagenumbers on the inside, intentionally?
Intentionally. 
Chapter beginnings seem to be on the left side, intentionally?
Intentionally. The groupings begin on the left side. Less 'cover', more starting the part.
OK!


Spaces between paragraphs

Spaces between paragraphs seem to vary, is this because of the way the pads are formatted or something to do with the processing after?

Due to processing after. TeX uses flexible spaces and tries to find the most optimal way to do the page breaks


Contents page / p.13

Not sure this is meant to be like this; we would like a bit more structure/readability/space for it

Yes.


Chapter intros

Loving the illustrations. Wondering about the quotes, if there is a way to treat them a bit more like ... citations; make more difference between them (a line? something?)

OK. I'll try something


Method icons

Very much liking the different styles (sometimes going inside, sometimes in the margin) but we would like to stabilize them, ie. HOW is always treated the same, even if different from URGENCY (but all appearances of URGENCY are treated the same). It seems you are using the '-' to make it do something else if what is follows longer but maybe this is more the problem of the editing, not to be solved graphically.

OK. The icons are not superfinished. I'll try to stabilize.

the word METHOD now disappears from the title. Is there a way to bring it back so you read the title-as-a-method.


REMEMBER

We don't think the text for 'REMEMBER' should go into a note. Somehow a style related to WARNING but ehm ... different?
REMEMBER seems to show up on every page, even if empty


Code blocks

p.32-33 for example ...
Feels like code blocks inside running text need an indent?


Useless scroll ... 

p.55 needs three empty wide pages added. [% NEWPAGE added]


make make make

Make up mark up ... (p.74) and make make do (p.119) are related?
Make up mark up needs some introduction/framing


lists

Markdown hierarchies seem not to be processed correctly? p.80-81


attachments

We invented something called ATACHMENTS, for longer/autonomous texts that we first wanted to add to the appendix,
but we decided they needed to be closer to the methods.
ATTACHMENTS will need a style to differentiate them from the methods somehow; for sure starting on a new page.


bibliography

We think it could be nice to gather the bibtex references in a bibliography at the back of the guide?


Index

We haven't done any work on this yet.

> One thing that would be nice to do (at least start) tomorrow, 
> would be the keyword index. Femke knows the process from conversations 
> (https://pad.constantvzw.org/p/conversations.keywords). 

Bibtex reference and foot note reference
Is it ok to do it that way ? 

bib tex
@misc{ text:1972:goto,
 author = {Edsger W. Dijkstra},
 title  = {A Case against the GOTO Statement},
 year   = {1972},
 url    = {https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD02xx/EWD215.html},
 note   = {accessed 9.2.2018}
}

and the footnote reference
ex: on but bad constructs [@[dijksra:1972:goto]. I still remem

A citation reference [@haraway:1996:witness]
A citation reference with pagenumber [@[1-8]haraway:1996:witness]

This means NOT [@[dijksra:1972:goto] BUT [@dijksra:1972:goto]


txt and %INCLUDE lines
is it working at the moment? does it make sense citing/including like that? it looks like we just copypasted directly the passages from pads in this last round

p.76 overlap of title and image ... we like the image!! but wondering about legibility