diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/guide-to-latex/exercises/chap3/exer3-3.tex')
-rw-r--r-- | Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/guide-to-latex/exercises/chap3/exer3-3.tex | 103 |
1 files changed, 103 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/guide-to-latex/exercises/chap3/exer3-3.tex b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/guide-to-latex/exercises/chap3/exer3-3.tex new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..4a9580c1e3a --- /dev/null +++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/guide-to-latex/exercises/chap3/exer3-3.tex @@ -0,0 +1,103 @@ +\documentclass[11pt]{article} +\pagestyle{myheadings} \markright{Exercises} +\pagenumbering{Roman} +\begin{document} +CAN VENICE BE SAVED? + +Water and Venice have always a complicated relationship. +The world's most famously wet city is also one of its most +famously endangered ones, forever being flooded by its +signature canals. Even since the 14th century, Italian +engineers have dreamed of ways to control the water. Now +a solution may be at hand: the Moses project, a vast series +of sea gates that may finally the sodden city dry. + +The need for Venetian water control has never been greater. +Especially high tides have caused major floods 10 times in +the past 67 years alone, most diastrously in 1966 when the +water in parts of the city climbed to more than 1.83 m. +Compression of sediment under the city, along with rising sea +levels, often causes smaller floods, shutting down businesses +and making sidewalks and squares impossible. + +The source of the problem is geography. Venice is primarily a +small cluster of interlocked islands set in the northern end of +a 536-sq.-km lagoon. A long ridge of land seperates the lagoon +from the far larger Gulf of Venice except at three major inlets. +These openings allow high gulf tides to become high Venetian tides, +with the water sometimes climbing far enough to swamp the city's +seawalls. + +In 1984 a commission composed of Italy's 50 largest engeneering and +construction firms was formed to find a way to control the water +flow through the inlets, and Moses is it. Moses, an acronym for the +plan's technical name as well as a lyrical reference to the parting of +the Red Sea, calls for 78 hollow sea gates---each up to 5 m thick, 20 m +wide and 27.5 m long---to be hinged to foundations, or caissons, in the +seabed and to lie flat there. The gates would usually be filled with +water, but when tides rises to a height of 1 m or more, compressse air +would pump the water out. The free end of the gates would then float +upwards, breaking the surface after about 30 minutes and sealing off +the inlets. Sea locks would permit permit ships to pass while the gates +are up. + +The project---which would take as long as ten years and cost at least +\$2.7 billion---could still run into obstacles, especially given the +fickle nature of Italian politics. Concerned that gates would be raised +so frequently and remain there so long that they would cause water in the +lagoon to grow stagnant, Greens are making that argument in an +environmental-impact review that could delay or even scuttle construction. +Even so, this is the closest Venice has come to a permanent solution to +its water problems in 700 years. By local bureaucratic standards, that's +not too bad. + +%---By Jeffrey Kluger. Reported by Jeff Israely/Rome---Time, June 2, 2003 + +\bigskip +ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THE GATES. + +The gates are made of steel covered with a resistant coating to prevent +building of algae and crustaceans. Every five years they're are scheduled +for removal and cleaning. + +The 78 hollow sea gates are filled with water most of the time and remain +out of sight in a foundation or cassion. During especially high tides, +compressed air flushes out the seawater. Within 30 min.\ the gates rise +to the surface and block the inlets. When the danger passes, water is +admitted back into the gates, causing them to sink within 15 min. + +\bigskip +PREFACE TO THE \LaTeX-GUIDE + +\medskip +A new edition to ``A Guide to \LaTeX'' begs the fundamental question: +Has \LaTeX\ changed so much since the appearance of the third edition in 1999 +that a new release of this manual is justified? + +The simple answer to that question is `Well \dots.' In 1994, the \LaTeX\ +world was in upheaval with the issue of the new version \LaTeXe, and the +second edition of the `Guide' came out just then to act as the bridge +between the old and new versions. By 1998, the initial teething problems had +been worked out and corrected through semi-annual releases, and the third +edition could describe an established, working system. However, homage was +still paid to the older 2.09 version since many users still employed its +familiar syntax, although they were most likely to be using it in a \LaTeXe\ +environment. \LaTeX\ has now reached a degree of stability that since 2000 +the regular updates have been reduced to annual events, which often appear +months after the nominal date, something that does not worry anyone. The old +version 2.09 is obsolete and should no longer play any role in such a manual. +In this fourth edition, it is reduced to an appendix just to document its +syntax and usage. + +But if \LaTeX\ itself has not changed substantially since 1999, many of its +peripherals have. The rise of programs like `pdf\TeX' and `dvipdfm' for +PDF output adds new possibilities, which are realized, not in \LaTeX\ +directly, but by means of more modern `packages' to extend the basic +features. The distribution of \TeX/\LaTeX\ installations has changed, such +that most users are given a complete, ready-to-run setup, with all the +`extras' that one used to have to obtain oneself. Those extras include +user-contributed packages, many of which are now considered indispensable. +Today `the \LaTeX\ system' includes much more than the basic kernel by Leslie +Lamport, encompassing the contributions of hundreds of other people. This +edition reflects this increase in breadth. +\end{document} |