HTML versions of the Guides

Documentation General
#39

DUH! For any users wanting to add any highlighting and such--a thing typically done by millions of students and others over the past few decades on their printed material and books by (usually yellow-colored) magic markers. That highlighting functionality can also be done now electronically on PDFs (as it is commonly done on such converted PDFs) and even carried over to printed hard copy, if users so desire to print them out afterward.

In addition to highlighting, editorial comments and the like by users could also be added directly to the PDF documents, among other capabilities.

Gary

#40

The big hole in that idea is that Adobe Acrobat Professional is a
Windows/MAC-only application that costs $449 US per license. That
leaves out those of us who use Linux... and the team members that
cannot afford that rather high license cost.

It may be a nice-to-have feature, but due to cost and OS restrictions,
it will probably remain a nice-to-have.

C.

#41

Hi :slight_smile:

Lol. Ok, so if anyone has time then it can be done but the ODTs have that sort
of functionality anyway and it slightly defeats the purpose of providing a pdf.
A nice layer of extra icing if anyone has time :slight_smile:
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#42

It costs the users absolutely NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING, as long as any version of Adobe Reader that was released within the past several years is used for reading the Acrobat-enabled PDFs.

All that is required is just ONE LO PERSON with Adobe Acrobat Professional to convert any PDF, a task that takes merely a few seconds per PDF. BTW, this Adobe functionality is not really new, as it has been around for a number of years already.

Public mention could be made that the PDFs were so enabled so that anybody desiring to mark them up could readily do so. Most of my clients readily use converted PDFs for their copyediting accepting/rejecting sessions--to the point that most prefer using edit tracking on PDFs instead of using the source DOC documents, once they became aware of that functionality.

Gary

#43

Does anyone know what pdf functionality LO exports have? I have never
tested it myself, no interest until now.

If they have the desire functionality then there is no reason to use
Acrobat, just export from LO. Personally I do not highlight books or
e-texts. For e-texts I use formatting to highlight important items for
the reader. If something you can using formating in the original to draw
the readers/users attention to it. If I need to edit a pdf file, I can
use pdf Edit in Linux and I assume there are Windows/Mac equivalents.

#44

It may be a nice-to-have feature, but due to cost and OS restrictions,
it will probably remain a nice-to-have.

It costs the users absolutely NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING, as long as any
version of Adobe Reader that was released within the past several years is
used for reading the Acrobat-enabled PDFs.

Gary, I wasn't referring to users needing the software to read the
PDF. I am fully aware that it's for producing the PDFs, not reading.
I've been using PDF readers and PDF generation tools for more years
than I'd like to admit :stuck_out_tongue:

All that is required is just ONE LO PERSON with Adobe Acrobat Professional
to convert any PDF, a task that takes merely a few seconds per PDF. BTW,
this Adobe functionality is not really new, as it has been around for a
number of years already.

OK, who gets to cough up $450 for a license? i know I certainly
cannot (I'd have a double whammy of the Acrobat license plus a Windows
license), and I would not presume to request any member of the team to
do so. If you personally have a license, then that's fine.. what
happens if you decide you're not working on LO docs anymore due to
other obligations? Or you're busy with your business clients during
one publish cycle and can't take care of that final production step?

My point was simple... the doc team needs to carefully consider any
process tools or other suggestions that will cost money. Are they
necessary? Is the gain something in demand from the audience or a neat
feature that 6 people might use? Does the team gain enough to justify
the cost? Does this take into account the team members using Linux?

C.

#45

I never mentioned that any reader of LO PDFs would need to use Acrobat.

Only one person at LO docs needs to employ Acrobat Professional--a brain-dead, simple, less-than-a-minute task--to enable any future users to employ Comment and Review on their PDFs.

It's really that difficult a concept. It imparts useful functionality, even though you might not ever use it. Millions do... on their printed documents, including books and memos.

Gary

#46

> Hi Gary,
>
>> Therefore, I suggest that every OOo/LO PDF file be so converted by
>> Adobe Acrobat Professional afterward, prior to release so that
>> OOo/LO users will have that extra functionality.
>
> What purpose do you want this functionality for?
>
>> ...
>> It seems foolish not to so enable them for the Comment and Review
>> function, considering its ease to do so with no added cost or real
>> time and effort...
>
> But for what purpose?
>
> Nino

DUH! For any users wanting to add any highlighting and such--a thing
typically done by millions of students and others over the past few
decades on their printed material and books by (usually
yellow-colored) magic markers.

Sorry, Gary, for my ignorance :wink:

I myself have never had the idea to use PDF and highlight something
therein, so I just did not know / could not imagine that this is done by
so many people today. I remember how happy we have been some decades ago
when PDF was "invented" and everybody could read a document with the
same layout all over the world. So I just did not recognize the
interactive capabilities of PDF today.

That highlighting functionality can
also be done now electronically on PDFs (as it is commonly done on
such converted PDFs) and even carried over to printed hard copy, if
users so desire to print them out afterward.

In addition to highlighting, editorial comments and the like by users
could also be added directly to the PDF documents, among other
capabilities.

From these facts I'd say: There is a grain of truth in your arguments
:wink:

But - however - I'd still say, if "we" provide a User Manual, then we do
this for one reason: to enable more users to use our software in a
better way. So primary goal is to attract/ enable/ empower /educate
software users. If some of them really want to highlight the manual or
enter comments, ok, maybe. But this is too far from the original purpose
in my humble eyes. So it might be good to offer it as a service from
someone who believes it makes the difference. But not for "us", who are
offering primarily the "core services". Just like many Extensions are
built by "external" persons. However, if they really provide a
substantial surplus, then people will love them and call for integration
into core. So the way to go is, at least for the moment, find someone to
implement the functionality, offer it publicly, and wait :slight_smile:

Nino

#47

Not trying to be terribly offensive, but you are carrying on like a Luddite...

I have Acrobat Pro, and I feel certain that other LO contributors do likewise.

Gary

#48

You can easily try it out. Try the Adobe website. They probably have such enabled PDFs for users to practice on.

Otherwise, email me, and I will send you as an attachment an enabled Writer Guide PDF.

Gary

#49

Gary

>
>>>>> Therefore, I suggest that every OOo/LO PDF file be so converted by
>>>>> Adobe Acrobat Professional afterward, prior to release so that
>>>>> OOo/LO users will have that extra functionality.
>>>> What purpose do you want this functionality for?
>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>> It seems foolish not to so enable them for the Comment and Review
>>>>> function, considering its ease to do so with no added cost or real
>>>>> time and effort...
>>>> But for what purpose?
>>>>
>>>> Nino
>>> DUH! For any users wanting to add any highlighting and such--a thing
>>> typically done by millions of students and others over the past few decades
>>> on their printed material and books by (usually yellow-colored) magic
>>> markers. That highlighting functionality can also be done now electronically
>>> on PDFs (as it is commonly done on such converted PDFs) and even carried
>>> over to printed hard copy, if users so desire to print them out afterward.
>>>
>>> In addition to highlighting, editorial comments and the like by users could
>>> also be added directly to the PDF documents, among other capabilities.
>> The big hole in that idea is that Adobe Acrobat Professional is a
>> Windows/MAC-only application that costs $449 US per license. That
>> leaves out those of us who use Linux... and the team members that
>> cannot afford that rather high license cost.
>>
>> It may be a nice-to-have feature, but due to cost and OS restrictions,
>> it will probably remain a nice-to-have.
>>
>> C.
>>
> Does anyone know what pdf functionality LO exports have? I have never
> tested it myself, no interest until now.
>
> If they have the desire functionality then there is no reason to use
> Acrobat, just export from LO. Personally I do not highlight books or
> e-texts. For e-texts I use formatting to highlight important items for
> the reader. If something you can using formating in the original to draw
> the readers/users attention to it. If I need to edit a pdf file, I can
> use pdf Edit in Linux and I assume there are Windows/Mac equivalents.

I never mentioned that any reader of LO PDFs would need to use Acrobat.

Only one person at LO docs needs to employ Acrobat Professional--a
brain-dead, simple, less-than-a-minute task--to enable any future users
to employ Comment and Review on their PDFs.

It's really that difficult a concept. It imparts useful functionality,
even though you might not ever use it. Millions do... on their printed
documents, including books and memos.

Gary

--

Gary Schnabl
Southwest Detroit, two miles NORTH! of Canada--Windsor, that is...

Technical Editor forum <http://TechnicalEditor.LivernoisYard.com/phpBB3/>

You are missing the point - I do not need Acrobat to generate a pdf
file. You can do it easily in LO. The pdf will open in Reader with no
problems. I just did it, accepting the default settings since was not
sure what all the settings did. Actually this was the first time I had
seen these settings and I suspect they setting for Reader/Acrobat. I
would not be surprised it you picked the correct settings you would get
the behavior you wanted.

#50

Thanks for the offer :slight_smile:

However, this will have to wait a bit because at the moment my brain is
too full that I can't think about even more things to busy myself with.

Nino

#51

Having the Review and Comment functionality on a PDF (to be done with Adobe Reader) must be first imparted by Acrobat Pro to that file. Trust me...

Gary

#52

GM (whose HQ is five miles from here...) sells vehicles that they build and equip some of them with options, some (most?) of which they do not manufacture themselves. Most buyers prefer having options being available (especially if they are thrown it at no extra cost), even though they may not use them, right away. OnStar is one of them that was used so much that GM bought the company that made it.

Gary

#53

Hi,

Most places that have any kind of leaflet, posters or documentation to download
want to have some control over the way it looks.  Sadly there is not an adequate
Open Document Format so people use PDF.  Since PDF is so widely used it forces
everyone to use it.  I don't think we can make a stand against that right now.
We have to use PDF or else marginalise ourselves.

Most places that do have pdfs to download also have a button to the Adobe site
to download their latest reader (for free) in case people can't read pdfs even
though that is desperately unlikely.  I think we should have a similar button
but perhaps we could choose someone other than Adobe?

True most people are conditioned to look a pdf file. But one save LO
documents with a password which maintains version/document control. This
feature is (also in MSO) is rarely used, I think because most people are
not aware of it. The Acrobat Reader is a marketing tool for Adobe to
make pdf popular and improve sales of the Acrobat. There are currently
several free readers for Linux and Windows. Some are considered better
than Reader itself. Maybe instead of link to Adobe we have a link, if
possible, to a FOSS pdf reader. People can still read the pdf and we
promote some sister projects.

What some have done to get around needing Acrobat to prepare pdf's is
use a suite like LO that can export the document as a pdf. Any pdf
generated we need can be done in LO and we state that on the page. Any
time we revise the document we do it using LO. I have been aware of this
feature in OOo/SO for many years when MSO did not have it.

I dunno, I may be conditioned, but I tend to look on PDF as a pretty
generic, independent format these days. I realise that Adobe owns the
copyright on PDF, but I have a third-party reader on my Linux system,
and such readers are/have been available for every/almost every
computing platform. So I don't tend to take much account of the
"political" implications, I just see the convenience/simplicity
aspect... So I see PDF as one very practical final publication medium.

ODF's .odt is the format for storing work in progress, although it can
perfectly well be used for viewing documentation, provided that the
user has LibO or another ODF-compatible tool installed. It allows us
to do perfectly adequate version tracking and team collaboration. For
instance, if we could get ODF integrated more into Alfresco, we'd have
a pretty cool tool. That's something I'll be investigating/agitating
for.

Practically-speaking, I reckon we'd be a bit short-handed to produce
HTML publications, and I don't see a *screaming* need for it. But if
somone disagrees and wants to put the time in to do the work, then
please dig out and go ahead - I'm sure we'll give you whatever support
we can.

#54

Gary is correct on this point.

As for doing that, Gary states elsewhere that it's a quick and easy
process for anyone who has Acrobat Pro. That is also correct.

I would put this in the bucket of "if Gary (or some other member of the
team who already has Acrobat Pro) wants to do this step for each of our
PDFs, then let them do it" -- except for the following reservations:

* If someone starts doing this, users will have an expectation that all
the LO user guide PDFs will have this functionality.

* If only 1 or 2 people are doing this, it puts them on the critical
path for publishing PDFs that meet the expectations mentioned above and
could cause a bottleneck, especially if the person were unavailable for
any reason.

BTW, I have Acrobat Pro, but I am not offering to do what Gary suggests
because it is on a (Windows) machine that I rarely turn on, so setting
the Review and Comment switch on a PDF is a much more time-consuming
effort which I might do only once a week, if that often.

--Jean

#55

sure :wink:

But we are not GM, however. If we could take money and initiate a
project, this would be fine.

But all we can do is be so attractive that volunteers deliberately
spring in and do the necessary work.

So while GM has to pay regard mainly to the external market, we have to
sell our ideas even to our "internal" fellows. This works partly by
sparking enthusiasm in their hearts. But it works better by just doing
it oneself and giving the result back to the community (if it is
successfull, of course).

So finally, why don't you "just do it" yourself?

Nino

#56

Duh! I did that--while I was making my lunch today: downloaded the Writer UG PDF from the LO site, enabled it with Acrobat, and test ran it with Adobe Reader. Time spent: Less than ten minutes, including time for posting emails, cooking, eating, a phone call, etc.

My point is some LO personnel should put aside any biases with regard to restrictive tendencies to avoid using proprietary software and the like. I realize that open-source exclusivity is nearly akin to be like a religion, for a few...

Late in my work career, I spent a few years teaching at both public and private K-12 schools in metro Detroit. Many of the brighter, college-oriented kids would, on their own, employ their magic markers for highlighting items in their books or other printed documents, much the same that we did decades earlier--both at school and afterward. Highlighting is actually very common; otherwise firms would not sell billions of Sharpies and the like.

But now, PDF editing/reviewing functionality can be effortlessly imparted to any and all PDFs, once enabled by a simple, one-time conversion by Acrobat for use for anybody with the ubiquitous Adobe Reader afterward.

Gary

#57

The number of PDFs in LO's library is very finite; plus, very few new PDFs are generated on a consistent basis. Converting them all could effortlessly be done in very short order.

Another thing that is really needed is accurate, well-written exposition for performing any Review and Comment (in this case, although that could also be done in other places), in addition to any other items that were not adequately covered (or, possibly covered in error...) in the existing user guides, to date.

For instance, I was redoing bits of the LO template. I altered the very first point--missing, in that case: for users of the templates to see to it that they already have the needed typeface (Liberation) installed so that its fonts are already installed before authoring or editing anything, lest the operating system might substitute another font for any missing font--thus altering the format in a manner that could be very difficult to detect. That point should have been made clear earlier, so I rewrote that part.

There are some other items that need redoing in the template. I will post what I have redone so far, so anybody could comment on my changes, make their own changes, among others.

Gary

#58

Hi

I used LibO 3.3 to produce a PDF file on windows 7. Opening the PDF using Acrobat X on windows 7 and you are able to use both highlights and comments. The review parts also seem enabled.

Highlights and comments definitely save. It maybe that this is possible already without Acrobat Pro.

Regards

John

Impressum (Legal Info) | Datenschutzerklärung (Privacy Policy)   Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.