722 lines
23 KiB
HTML
722 lines
23 KiB
HTML
<!-- MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
|
|
<!--X-Subject: Open Document Environment (ODE) -->
|
|
<!--X-From-R13: Yvz Zrfgre <xvzNqshfvba.pbz.nh> -->
|
|
<!--X-Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2000 03:31:02 -0500 (EST) -->
|
|
<!--X-Message-Id: 3876F51E.3DF0E10E@dfusion.com.au -->
|
|
<!--X-Content-Type: text/plain -->
|
|
<!--X-Head-End-->
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML//EN">
|
|
<html>
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>Open Document Environment (ODE)</title>
|
|
<link rev="made" href="mailto:kim@dfusion.com.au">
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
<!--X-Body-Begin-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
[<a href="msg00992.html">Date Prev</a>][<a href="msg00980.html">Date Next</a>][<a href="msg01073.html">Thread Prev</a>][<a href="msg01006.html">Thread Next</a>][<a href="maillist.html#01002">Date Index</a>][<a href="threads.html#01002">Thread Index</a>]
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-->
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-Begin-->
|
|
<h1>Open Document Environment (ODE)</h1>
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><em>To</em>: oswg-discuss <<A HREF="mailto:oswg-discuss@oswg.org">oswg-discuss@oswg.org</A>>, gnome-doc-list <<A HREF="mailto:gnome-doc-list@gnome.org">gnome-doc-list@gnome.org</A>>, linuxkb-discuss <<A HREF="mailto:linuxkb-discuss@seul.org">linuxkb-discuss@seul.org</A>>, ldp-discuss <<A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A>>, osrt <<A HREF="mailto:osrt@metalab.unc.edu">osrt@metalab.unc.edu</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Subject</em>: Open Document Environment (ODE)</li>
|
|
<li><em>From</em>: Kim Lester <<A HREF="mailto:kim@dfusion.com.au">kim@dfusion.com.au</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Date</em>: Sat, 08 Jan 2000 08:28:14 +0000</li>
|
|
<li><em>Organization</em>: Datafusion Systems Pty Ltd</li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-cc</em>: recipient list not shown: ;</li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-date</em>: 8 Jan 2000 08:30:49 -0000</li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-from</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-message-id</em>: <cJJhcB.A.uSE.5Wvd4@murphy></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-sender</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>Sender</em>: <A HREF="mailto:kim@new-smtp2.ihug.com.au">kim@new-smtp2.ihug.com.au</A></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-Begin-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-->
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks to all those who responsed! I've taken your ideas on board and
|
|
included them below. Keep it up.
|
|
To those of you who haven't had a chance yet, please respond and
|
|
come on board. Now is the time before recommendations get set in stone!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What we are trying to achieve
|
|
=============================
|
|
|
|
To reiterate the point of this post:
|
|
|
|
Stop evolving documentation systems and bring all the documentation
|
|
together in one easy to access form.
|
|
|
|
Let me summarise so far:
|
|
|
|
A number ofgroups are working on mostly different aspects
|
|
of either documentation itself or documentation retrieval etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who
|
|
===
|
|
|
|
The organisations that I am now aware of include:
|
|
|
|
Linux Documaentation Project (LDP) <A HREF="http://www.ldp.org">http://www.ldp.org</A>
|
|
Linux Knowledge Base Project <A HREF="http://www.linuxkb.org">http://www.linuxkb.org</A>
|
|
Gnome Documentation Project (GDP) <A HREF="http://www.gnome.org">http://www.gnome.org</A>
|
|
Open Source Research Team <A HREF="http://metalab.unc.edu/osrt/projects.html">http://metalab.unc.edu/osrt/projects.html</A>
|
|
Open Software Writers Group <A HREF="http://www/oswg.org">http://www/oswg.org</A>
|
|
|
|
Interest has also been shown by an electronic publisher to produce
|
|
hardcopy versions of the resulting high-quality documentation.
|
|
|
|
If you know of any (non-commerical) doc group that I've left out please
|
|
let me/them know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
How
|
|
===
|
|
|
|
I'm not even going to attempt all this on my own, if the community can't
|
|
be
|
|
far-sighted enough and altrusitic enough to help then the task will be
|
|
futile.
|
|
I'd at least hope for enlightened self-interest! :-)
|
|
|
|
Ultimately we could create a new mailing list covering all member
|
|
groups, perhaps
|
|
with the other existing groups as subgroups of this.
|
|
I'm currently forcing it on you for now as we keep getting new special
|
|
interest document groups and no-one appears to have shown interest in
|
|
cooperating.
|
|
|
|
I have joined the LDP, GDP, LKBP OSWG discussion groups and will cc this
|
|
thread to
|
|
all groups above (unless I get too many childish flames). I believe this
|
|
is one of the few
|
|
time when, what is effectively cross posting, is important to this
|
|
community.
|
|
|
|
To those of you in advance who are going to object to my cross posting
|
|
invading
|
|
your personal world, I'd say look around you. The best things in life,
|
|
the web,
|
|
Linux etc were made through cooperation. Maybe we all have to give a
|
|
little ground
|
|
but the result will be far better than any one group could have achieved
|
|
on its own.
|
|
|
|
I propose creating an umbrella group of which all (hopefully) the
|
|
above groups would be members.
|
|
|
|
This group would coordinate the infra-structure of all documentation,
|
|
(ie the "ideal" format, the permitted formats, the indexing/xref'ing
|
|
scheme
|
|
papaer output etc).
|
|
Once this has been dertermined (with all your input and expertise)
|
|
everyone
|
|
can, more-or-less get on with waht they were doing before, but in this
|
|
agreed
|
|
framework.
|
|
|
|
|
|
WHY am I trying to do this ?
|
|
============================
|
|
|
|
This is a serious attempt at getting badly needed coordination. It is
|
|
NOT about control.
|
|
I am in no way interested in controlling anyone. I am interested in
|
|
coordinating
|
|
a unified effort with everyones help.
|
|
|
|
I respect that each one of the above groups has slighty different goals.
|
|
This is actually good as the task is large. If we change "goals" to
|
|
"areas of responsibility" I think we could really get somewhere -
|
|
together.
|
|
|
|
I respect the amount of effort many of you have put in,
|
|
in your own areas and groups. I do not wish to detract from that,
|
|
nor do I wish to take away anything from the individual groups.
|
|
|
|
It will take me a little while to digest all the different group areas,
|
|
so bear
|
|
with me on this, and help me out by becoming part of this discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE: All the following is open to comment/suggestion. This has to be a
|
|
community effort. I want to encourange informed debate, but not create
|
|
a free-for-all anything-goes environment. This is counter-productive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scope of Group
|
|
==============
|
|
|
|
I've tentatively named the umbrella group "Open Documentation
|
|
Environment (ODE)"
|
|
Ode is also a relevant word.
|
|
(Maybe for the trekkers amongst you it should be called "ODO" Open Doc
|
|
Org.
|
|
after all ODO is very flexible.... :-) )
|
|
|
|
I wanted to avoid using one of the existing group's names
|
|
as experience indicates this leads to ownership issues.
|
|
Humans can be difficult at times. Sigh!
|
|
|
|
My initial area of interest was Linux and its software. However I
|
|
realised that
|
|
software like Gnome etc are broader than just linux. This is fine as the
|
|
document infrastructure I'm proposing supports that. It does need to be
|
|
said
|
|
though that the system _may_ end up being used in other areas, we should
|
|
encourage
|
|
this and not be biased against it.
|
|
|
|
In the first instance I suspect that most of the work will be done in
|
|
the linux area though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
General Design Goals
|
|
====================
|
|
|
|
* Implementation of a Bookshelf concept
|
|
A bookshelp is a simple visual pardigm.
|
|
There would be bookselves in a range of categories (eg End User,
|
|
Administrator, Developer).
|
|
Only the relevant Bookshelves need to be displayed (by default) for any
|
|
user. Searches
|
|
would also be confined to selected bookshelves.
|
|
|
|
Books on any topic could be added to a bookshelf. General book writing
|
|
guidelines
|
|
would keep books releveant to their category.
|
|
|
|
Bookshelves could be added to via a web site.
|
|
Thus a user has a list of available books.
|
|
Books would be installed wither locally, on a LAN or on the net.
|
|
All would appear to the user. (Maybe different colours etc ro indicate
|
|
local/LAN/web access etc).
|
|
|
|
All this would be transparent to the user. Available book contents
|
|
pages/indexes would automatically
|
|
be downloaded and available for perusal. If a WEB based book looked
|
|
interesting then either the whole
|
|
book or just a few pages could be downloaded asrequired.
|
|
|
|
Indexing/cross referencing should also provide the ability to show info
|
|
(maybe in a pastel hue) of
|
|
information on say software that is available but not installed.
|
|
So many time users have not been aware of installed software let alone
|
|
software avaialble on the net.
|
|
For example if I wanted an image editor.
|
|
I could ask for a search on "Image Editors (Raster)" and be told that I
|
|
had say one on my system and
|
|
3 avaialble for download from the net. "Hmmm the installed one doesn't
|
|
do what I wnat. But this other one
|
|
interests me I'll download its overview page and maybe help contents.
|
|
Looks good, ok go get it."
|
|
|
|
I have dozens (probably hundreds of programs installed on my system)
|
|
that I don't use.
|
|
Why are they there?
|
|
Because
|
|
a) I might need them
|
|
b) I don't know they're there.
|
|
c) I don't need them but they were installed anyway because I didn't
|
|
know any better
|
|
|
|
It would be so much better to install just a few "common" apps and ta
|
|
good documetnation system.
|
|
Then have the others books/apps installed on demand.
|
|
With the bookshelf system we have access to the docs of programs not
|
|
installed so we don't ahve to worry about
|
|
missing out (and often installing everything just to be sure)!
|
|
Then we'd install just what we needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE: In the future this could also support download of commercial
|
|
books/sw for a fee, but we
|
|
won't deal with that for now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Books might actually consist of docuemnts that appear in several places
|
|
as relevant.
|
|
Eg a technical chapter on PPP configuration might appear as a
|
|
document/book under Installation
|
|
and also under Administration and even uder Operating System
|
|
(internals). ALthough one has
|
|
to be careful it can be taken too far. It is not a substitude for
|
|
sloppy categorisation!
|
|
|
|
SGI have/had a reasonable bookshelp concept, it would be useful to
|
|
examine this for ideas.
|
|
|
|
* All books/documents appear to be in ONE format (from reader's
|
|
perspective).
|
|
Ideally this means look at feel similar.
|
|
|
|
I'm not suggesting that we enforce a specific look and feel,
|
|
but that we conform to a set of directives (eg all titles have a TITLE
|
|
tag)
|
|
such that all titles can be made to look similar.
|
|
|
|
Recommend a default look and feel (X windowing system made the mistake
|
|
of
|
|
not recommending a look and feel. The result was chaos for many years!)
|
|
|
|
Books in a range of other formats are converted (one-time or
|
|
on-the-fly) into
|
|
the common format
|
|
|
|
|
|
Human Issues
|
|
============
|
|
|
|
There are no doubt going to be some religous wars on formats.
|
|
Some would rather die than give up their favourite format.
|
|
Hopefully the converters will address some of these issues and permit
|
|
personal preferences to prevail.
|
|
|
|
HOWEVER. What I want us to achieve is something better for everyone.
|
|
If you'd rather defend your personal rights to the death and refuse to
|
|
be
|
|
part of something bigger then I wish you good luck. But such attitudes
|
|
tend
|
|
to result in individuals and groups pushed towards the fringes rather
|
|
than being
|
|
in the main stream success.
|
|
|
|
There are still people out there who think CPM (an early OS) is the
|
|
best thing ever.
|
|
Well I can appreciate their right to that belief, but they aren't
|
|
interested moving forward.
|
|
We will probably all have to give some ground for a common good...
|
|
If you have a technically valid issue, join in the discussion and lets
|
|
work it out!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working Group Tasks
|
|
===================
|
|
|
|
The group should examine the skills and technologies of a) group
|
|
members, b) other technology
|
|
and come up with recommendations for:
|
|
|
|
Initial Documentation Areas
|
|
- split into broad subject areas right down to key topics.
|
|
|
|
Documentation Technology
|
|
- determine the best OUTPUT technology to support
|
|
a) Good presentation
|
|
b) hierarchical doc structure
|
|
c) Extensive cross-referencing
|
|
d) High Quality Printing
|
|
|
|
- determine how best to massage existing formats into the new format.
|
|
Identify existing documetn formats.
|
|
(Important docs would need editing, others could be auto
|
|
processed at least initially)
|
|
|
|
Documentation "Browser" Technology.
|
|
- determine specs for a world-class doc viewer/search-engine/etc
|
|
that fits the chosen OUTPUT technology
|
|
- take into account existing software but not be hamstrung by it.
|
|
- might support basic browsing with existing software and more
|
|
advanced functions with an open-source customised browser.
|
|
- include any xref/search engine
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal Stuff
|
|
===========
|
|
|
|
I hate layers, I hate legal documents. They often end up spoiling
|
|
things.
|
|
Everything seems to require some legal statement though..
|
|
|
|
The author maintains ownership of his/her document and authors name
|
|
must always be included.
|
|
Perhaps provide a history log of editors. If a doc becomes inaccurate
|
|
then editing
|
|
must be permitted regardless. (Seems a bit hard, but I'm tired of
|
|
inaccurate docs
|
|
that don't get changed). Note sure about aesthetic editing.
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure whether docs should be allowedto have individual Licenses.
|
|
Maybe just permit
|
|
one or two common licenses (GNU ?). Licenses should permit free
|
|
use/printing of docs for personal
|
|
use. Non-profit distribution must also be royalty free. For-profit
|
|
distribution (eg proper publishing)
|
|
should perhaps be based on typical industry royalties and then
|
|
percentages given either to key authors
|
|
and/or the remainder put in something like an ODE non-rpofit fund to
|
|
pay for even better doc.
|
|
|
|
I'm aware of two other doc licenses: Open Content License and GNU Free
|
|
Documentation License.
|
|
I haven't read them yet.
|
|
|
|
I'd welcome any better suggestions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following are a zeroth order draft of the above areas, as somewhere
|
|
to start.
|
|
|
|
NOTE: To those of you not into Linux, please bear with me I have
|
|
to start the discussion somewhere. I'd welcome contributions!
|
|
|
|
Initial Documentation Areas
|
|
===========================
|
|
|
|
Note keeps apps and utlitities separate from OS implementations where
|
|
possible.
|
|
eg the unix "date" command whilst compiled for and available under
|
|
Linux is also
|
|
available on any system compiling GNU tools.
|
|
It should thus be available in a cross ref under "Linux->Commands" but
|
|
if the linux
|
|
specific docs are removed then it ought to remain available under the
|
|
more general
|
|
Unix->Commands.
|
|
Note I haven't fully developed a plan for this yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Bookshelves
|
|
-------------------
|
|
|
|
System Installation
|
|
General User Guide
|
|
Tools and Applications
|
|
Administration
|
|
|
|
Application Software Developer
|
|
Operating System
|
|
Operating System Developer
|
|
Hardware
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are a number of ways to divide bookshelves.
|
|
I have initially divided them based on gut feeling from years of
|
|
personal experience
|
|
and problem solving for users.
|
|
|
|
Tools and Apps are separate as all levels of users need to look up this
|
|
info.
|
|
|
|
Most of the bookshelves would have a combination of books that might
|
|
come under
|
|
the categories of
|
|
Guides
|
|
Reference
|
|
|
|
|
|
System Installation
|
|
-------------------
|
|
I guess this might be a separate bookshelf although parts of it come
|
|
under Admin and
|
|
parts user.
|
|
|
|
Linux Installation
|
|
i) General Linux Installation
|
|
ii) <Vendor Specific> Installation
|
|
iii) <Vendor + Version Specific> Installation/Notes
|
|
iv) Errata
|
|
|
|
|
|
General User Guide
|
|
------------------
|
|
|
|
a) Desktop Environment
|
|
Current (ie what is being run now)
|
|
Others )other availabe environments)
|
|
|
|
This should contain all the "getting to know you" stuff
|
|
In particular it should distinguish between the current installed
|
|
software and
|
|
other options.
|
|
|
|
It is important to distinguish the current environement setup from
|
|
possible setups.
|
|
It is too mcuh to expect a novice user to know that he/she is currently
|
|
running
|
|
Enlightenment WM on Gnome on X on Unix. Even I forget which WM I'm
|
|
running half
|
|
the time! The "Other" section would list alternives that the user
|
|
might prefer
|
|
to explore along with references to how to setup/install/activate these
|
|
alternatives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tools and Applications
|
|
----------------------
|
|
a) Major Applications
|
|
Listed By Name
|
|
Xref By Category (Word Process, Text Edit, Spreadsheet,
|
|
Drawing)
|
|
|
|
b) Utilities/Tools
|
|
Listed by Name
|
|
Listed by Category (Disk, Net, File Manip, Text Manip,
|
|
etc)
|
|
(Listed By Problem/Solution)
|
|
|
|
c) Man pages
|
|
|
|
Administration
|
|
--------------
|
|
|
|
Key Topics/Overview
|
|
|
|
Tasks by Topic
|
|
a) Logs
|
|
b) LAN
|
|
c) Internet (SLIP/PPP etc)
|
|
d) User Accounts
|
|
e) Routine Maintenace
|
|
f) Hardware Problems
|
|
g) ...
|
|
.
|
|
z) (Man Pages)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application Software Developer
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
Language Summary/Overviews
|
|
Languages...
|
|
Debuggers
|
|
(Man Pages)
|
|
|
|
X11 Developer
|
|
|
|
Gnome Developer
|
|
Overview
|
|
Style Guide
|
|
API Reference
|
|
|
|
KDE Developer
|
|
|
|
Window Manager...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hardware
|
|
Board Level Docs (disks, graphics cards etc)
|
|
|
|
|
|
etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Documentation Technology
|
|
========================
|
|
|
|
Existing doc formats
|
|
--------------------
|
|
plain text
|
|
- some HOWTOs (semi structured)
|
|
- READMEs/Changes/INSTALL instructions etc (semi structured)
|
|
- FAQs (semi structured)
|
|
- misc notes
|
|
man pages
|
|
- all command line unix commands
|
|
custom application help
|
|
HTML
|
|
- some HOWTOs
|
|
- some FAQs
|
|
- Introductory Docs
|
|
- Distribution docs (eg RedHat)
|
|
texInfo
|
|
SGML
|
|
XML
|
|
DocBook DTD (XML/SGML)
|
|
(RPM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed doc "OUTPUT" format
|
|
----------------------------
|
|
It has bveen suggested that there really isn't any excuse for
|
|
plain text any more as a plain doc can be made at least HTML
|
|
compliant with a couple fo minutes extra work.
|
|
|
|
There are also man/html converters around so the man page
|
|
format may not be as sacrosanct as once thoguht.
|
|
(being able to see good ascii output when typing "man fred"
|
|
is still a requirement though.
|
|
|
|
It thus seems feasible to have a single "meta format".
|
|
Ideally all documents would be in this format, and in time
|
|
they might be, but for now there need to be converters from
|
|
existing formats (may such beasts already exist).
|
|
|
|
Whatever standard we agree upon as the meta/Output format
|
|
it should be extensible and flexible enough to adapt to things
|
|
that we havent thought of yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Converters from existing formats to "OUTPUT" format
|
|
---------------------------------------------------
|
|
Some existing document systems are extensive enough that
|
|
conversion to a new format by hand could be prohibitive.
|
|
|
|
Some docs may be converted one-time into the new format
|
|
other (which are still being edited by other groups who
|
|
can't/won't change formats might have to be converted
|
|
on-the-fly from their native formats.
|
|
|
|
Other docs should just be changed, either by authors or group
|
|
members. Once there is enough momentum I envisage that encouraging
|
|
many existing doc. maintainers to put in a little extra work for
|
|
the good of all will become easier.
|
|
|
|
My first guess for an output format would be XML possibly using the
|
|
DocBook DTD (<A HREF="http://docbook.org/">http://docbook.org/</A>) maybe with some extra tags.
|
|
|
|
Issues
|
|
------
|
|
Ease of adding/copying/indexing books
|
|
Support transfer of just sections of a book (eg specific
|
|
sections/pages) as
|
|
required to be downloaded from the web - ie don't require whole book.
|
|
|
|
It owuld be good to provide links from within apps to a common doc.
|
|
set.
|
|
Sometimes apps have internal help systems which are
|
|
a) uselss as they tell you nothing much
|
|
b) very helpful but not accessible outside the app.
|
|
|
|
Lets pursue a policy of "write once, read many" (WORM - yes I know it
|
|
comes from MO technology)
|
|
ie maximise the access to any documentation. This could include context
|
|
sensitive tags
|
|
activated within an application that open up to a specific part of the
|
|
application book.
|
|
|
|
RPM
|
|
---
|
|
Open to debate, but I added RPM to the "doc" list as it is becoming an
|
|
increasingly important tool for the distribution of software.
|
|
For those of you not familiar with it, RPM is a software distribution
|
|
tool
|
|
that pacakges up the files in a software/document/etc sub-system along
|
|
with
|
|
an info summary and installation scripts.
|
|
|
|
RPM could be important in two areas:
|
|
1) it could be a convenient ODE Book distribution/installation/update
|
|
mechanim.
|
|
2) it could provide a useful method of creating a "virtual" book of
|
|
installed software.
|
|
|
|
Of course installed software should have documentation pages under the
|
|
new system but in
|
|
the meantime RPM has at least a few lines of comments about each
|
|
package and a broad category
|
|
for that package (eg Applications/Internet).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Browser Technology
|
|
==================
|
|
|
|
Leverage existing efforts.
|
|
|
|
Indexing/Cross Referencing
|
|
--------------------------
|
|
Produce access to a comprehensive indexing system and permuted index
|
|
etc.
|
|
Here the expertise of the OSoRT group will greatly help!
|
|
Indexing by
|
|
Book/Doc Title
|
|
book text
|
|
concept keywords/category (eg Text Editors->Graphical" or "PPP
|
|
Problems")
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Gnome Help Browser might be a good GUI software vehicle with which
|
|
to start experimenting.
|
|
|
|
Initial GUI Thoughts
|
|
--------------------
|
|
|
|
I'd like to see a doc browser a bit like one of MSoft's (eeek!)
|
|
development doc system.
|
|
The key idea is a panel at the left with a tree view and the document
|
|
panel at the right.
|
|
Might also have a separate document/book-chapter/section broswer to
|
|
quickly pick out sections
|
|
in the current book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
regards
|
|
Kim Lester
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
|
|
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<ul><li><strong>Follow-Ups</strong>:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="01006" href="msg01006.html">Re: Open Document Environment (ODE)</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> Aaron Turner <aturner@linuxkb.org></li></ul></li>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="01005" href="msg01005.html">Re: Open Document Environment (ODE)</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> <dave@lafn.org></li></ul></li>
|
|
</ul></li></ul>
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
|
|
<!--X-References-->
|
|
<!--X-References-End-->
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>Prev by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg00992.html">Re: Critique of draft GNU Free Doucumentation License v1.0</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg00980.html">Subscrib terry.macewen@pobox.com</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Previous by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg01073.html">Re: Critique of draft GNU Free Documentation License v1.0</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg01006.html">Re: Open Document Environment (ODE)</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Index(es):
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a href="maillist.html#01002"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="threads.html#01002"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|