diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'usergrps/uktug/baskervi/6_1/bv61gle.tex')
-rw-r--r-- | usergrps/uktug/baskervi/6_1/bv61gle.tex | 196 |
1 files changed, 196 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/6_1/bv61gle.tex b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/6_1/bv61gle.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..be5ea4f30b --- /dev/null +++ b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/6_1/bv61gle.tex @@ -0,0 +1,196 @@ +%\newcommand{\TUB}{\textsc{Tug}boat} +%\newcommand{\BV}{\textsl{Baskerville}} + +\title{Malcolm's Gleanings} +\author{Malcolm Clark\\\texttt{m.clark@warwick.ac.uk}} + +\begin{Article} +\newcommand{\dvi}{\texttt{dvi}} +\newcommand{\Gut}{\textsl{Cahiers \textsc{Gut}enberg}} + +%\iffalse +\section{Out of \MF\ comes forth riches} +Dougie Henderson, who some may recall as the author of the first +practical implementation of \MF\ for the PC (marketed by Personal \TeX), +who worked with Blue Sky Research for several years (the creators of +\textsl{Textures}, still the finest implementation of \TeX\ on a +personal machine, and a version of \MF\ for the Mac), and who was a +member of the TUG board for many years, left the \TeX\ world a few years +ago to brew beer. Microbreweries are a hot item in the US: Dougie's +brewery \textsl{Hair of the Dog} won a rather coveted award for its +\textsl{Adambier} -- described as `A very full bodied, ``take no +prisoners'' beer'. The \textsl{Malt Advocate Awards Program} selects +outstanding products and individuals in the beer and whisky industries. +\textsl{Hair of the Dog} won `Domestic Beer of the Year': to give you +some idea of their level and appropriateness, their `Import Whisky of +the Year' was a 16-year old \textsl{Lagavulin} (by coincidence a +distillery Dougie and I visited in 1993), the `Import beer of the year' +the wonderful Belgian \textsl{Duvel}, and for the `Industry Leader' they +chose Michael Jackson, who has probably done more than any other +individual to spread the word of fine malt whisky and `craft' beers. I +think this gives hope to us all: there \emph{is} life after \TeX! + +%\fi + +%\iffalse +\section{Indefatigable} +Readers of the \textsl{Times Higher Education Supplement} will have seen +that Allan Reese continues his guerilla war of attrition on the +detractors of \TeX. +In the January edition of the \textsl{Multimedia} supplement +he comments on an article in the December supplement, correcting some +misunderstandings and misapprehensions. Another accolade to that man. +%\fi + +\iffalse +\section{Spoiled for choice} +Of course, there is much to be done. I picked up a copy of a self-styled +Internet book in Dillon's CyberStation the other day, to be told that +\LaTeX\ was a Unix utility. With what confidence can I approach the rest +of this book? +\fi + +\section{Guesting} +It was pointed out that there were no gleanings in \BV\ 5(5) because I +was busy trying to knock an edition of \TUB\ into shape. As part of +Michel Goossens' scheme to revitalise TUG, it was thought imperative to +try to get \TUB\ appearing regularly, if not on time. One ploy was to +invite (or instruct) `guest editors', thus relieving the usual crew from +some of the work, and perhaps achieving the throughput needed. + +I still believe in the Internet (an act of faith, on a par with +religion -- like \TeX\ itself). But my faith was a little shaken by the +experience. Since I do not have all the various macros, classes and +paraphernalia on my local machine (far less my machine at home), I +decided to do most of the editing locally, FTP it to the \TUB\ machine +at SCRI in Florida, use the installation there, ship the \dvi\ back by +FTP and view or print locally. +This strategy at least ensured that I was using the same files that +would be run by the editorial team for the finished copy. It also +ensured that I minimised network traffic. Text files are not too large, +and \dvi\ is also fairly compact. I had found that trying to edit over +the Internet, though possible, was painful. Even a rather dumb, +efficient, editor like \texttt{vi} could get badly out of +synchronisation. It was far easier to edit locally. Maybe it really took +the same amount of lapsed time, when you include the transfers, but the +wear and tear on my nerves was minimised. However, despite all this, I +still found that the only practical times to do the work was either +Saturday morning up to about~1 or~2 in the afternoon, or Sunday mornings +up to a similar time. The melt-down or brown out of the Internet seems +to hit about lunch time GMT, even at weekends. Sigh. + +However, the edition was eventually completed to my satisfaction. +There were a few page breaks that could have been improved, but given +the complexity of the problem, with lots of floating figures (always the +bane of \LaTeX), I was quite happy. I would have liked to impose my own +stamp on it by adopting ragged right throughout, but it is a rather +awkward interposition, especially for a periodical which has been +`designed' for justified margins. You just cannot be sure that ragged +right will be appropriate in all circumstances. To do that you need to +redesign from scratch, the way the previous guest edited +\TUB\footnote{Volume 7(1), guest edited by David Kellerman and Barry +Smith, designed by Martha Gannett} was. Now I appreciate just how +excellent that edition was, although I was dubious of the design when I +first saw it, before my appreciation and understanding of the issues +matured. + +It is interesting to ask what a guest editor does. I don't know +that I had a very clear brief. I decided first to assemble the papers, +using some which had been submitted to the annual conference, a couple +which had appeared elsewhere (in \BV\ and \Gut) and another I +invited. Between them I think this gave a reasonable balance, though I +was very conscious that there were some areas that needed to be filled +out more. My early plan had been to ensure that these articles hung +together, referred to one another appropriately, +were consistent in tone, used much the same acronyms and logos. In other +words, that they blended together in terms of their appearance, if not +the message of the individuals' writing. Then I discovered I should +worry about line and page breaks -- how it would appear in \TUB. This is +easily the most time-consuming part. Introducing deliberate breaks has a +tendency to alter everything that comes after; and you must also run all +the articles together since in standard \TUB\ form the next article +starts when the previous one ends. They don't start at the top of a new +page. In the end I was shipping the entire \dvi\ file across the `fat +pipe'. The front matter, end matter and page headings were the +responsibility of the rest of the editorial team. After all, I didn't +know how much front matter there was and couldn't predict page +numbers. That appears to have been the source of a problem. Somehow, +when the \TUB\ came to be printed it had the headers at the same +position on each page. Normally they would be left- and right-page +oriented. I doubt that many people would have noticed this, or, if +they had, they would have assumed that it was a design +quirk. Unfortunately Barbara Beeton saw fit to announce it loudly to the +world as a flaw. The edition took several months from my `finishing' it +to going to print. It seems to have been thoroughly re-edited by what +was once termed the \textsc{Gnaw}.\footnote{Only a small prize for the +first correct expansion of this scurrilous and sexist acronym.} The +irony is that it was just this process which Michel sought to +eliminate. One suspects that there are mightier forces of conservatism +and inertia arrayed against him than he knows. Sigh. + +It has been interesting to read the several accounts of the expected +rescheduling of \TUB. Compare the following: +\begin{itemize} +\item +16(1): ``You will receive 16(2) and 16(3) before the end of the calendar +year; +the December issue, 16(4) will be out in early 1996.'' +\item +16(2): ``\dots\ the last issue of 1995\dots\ you will hopefully receive +it in the first half of January.'' +\item +16(3): ``\dots four \TUB's on our member's desks before Christmas 1995'' +(i.e.\ 15(4) to 16(3)). In passing, some attention to the use of +the apostrophe is needed here, unless we really do have only one member. +I personally would worry more about grammar than running heads. +\end{itemize} +I received 16(2) in December or so, and 16(3) arrived in the first +week of January (so a very close miss): 16(4)? +Over to you Michel. + +\iffalse +\section{TUG on course?} +My feelings on TUG are rather ambivalent. I served on the Board for many +years, and for one I filled the post of President. I have seen it from +the inside, and, with other members of TUG, tried hard to ensure that it +would proceed along a path which could ensure its survival. The slimming +down of the permanent staff and the greater role of volunteers were some +of the issues we tackled. Times have changed. TUG is only one \TeX\ user +group among many. \TUB\ went badly off course (I wanted it to become a +regular commercial journal with wider interests, and in fact could have +achieved that but for some conservative elements close to \TUB\ +itself). The change in world politics meant that there were increased +demands for TUG to expend resource in promoting \TeX\ in areas where +there was unlikely to be any return in increased membership. The whining +from some European groups made many long-serving US members believe that +TUG should indeed be a US user group, just to be rid of this continuous +self-seeking. The distribution of the annual conference (which, to some +extend had helped support TUG financially) to forays into Europe eroded +the financial base slightly. The increased expectation that you should +get everything for free cannot help the vendors who have subsidised and +supported \TeX\ activity: just count up the advertisements in \TUB. The +fingers of one hand should be enough. +Fortunately the ludicrous demands to print \TUB\ in Eastern Europe and +almost give it away were never enacted. That would have been a rapid +route to ruin. + +The current low number of members worries me. The organisation seems to +be below a viable level. The conferences attract relatively few people +and I conclude they are largely irrelevant to the majority of members +and \TeX\ users -- or at least, that their needs are being met +elsewhere. Do people join just for the delight of \TUB? I think I have a +fairly broad interest in the subject, but most of \TUB\ leaves me cold +(with the exception of 16(2), of course!). I applaud Michel's vision for +the future, and I know he has the support of the redoubtable and +energetic Sebastian Rahtz. I'm less convinced that their efforts are +understood by the other office bearers or the permanent staff. As I +recall from my own period of office, even the best intentions can be +frustratingly difficult to achieve. Time, I think, to follow Dougie's +example and tend my fruggles. +\fi + +\end{Article} + + + + |