[tex-live] documentation for "geometry"
Gerben.Wierda at rna.nl
Wed Dec 21 18:04:09 CET 2005
>>>>>> "Karl" == Karl Berry <karl at freefriends.org> writes:
> > In TL there are many files which cannot be accessed by
> > texdoctk yet. I admit I don't see that as sufficient reason to
invent strict new directory structures.
> > It seems to me that what would be most general/useful is to create
doc-related data files which list what files are available, what
language they are in, and so on. texdoc/texdoctk could be
> > modified to read such files much more easily than we change the
whole tree around.
> Yes but we need some conventions for the file system to avoid name
clashes. There are too many files "manual.pdf" yet.
> When I suggested a scheme like
> I always thought about whether we need <category> at all. But I think
that we need it, we can no longer rely on the fact that filenames are
unique on a system. We have 55,312 files in TL already.
> XML files don't help. We need a directory standard to avoid name
clashes. And Context and LaTeX are different worlds. I think that Hans
should name his files as he likes without trying to avoid name clashes
with LaTeX files. This can only be achieved with a proper file system
> And if we are in luck, the number of files increases linearly with time.
Then we have 100,000 files in ten years. But I fear that it increases
> We really depend on directories.
And those *are* uniquely named, generally. So why not use the directory
names as information and combine that with a set of fixed standard names
(like manual, readme, etc)? When the file is called
"dtexdoc geometry" could open it and "dtexdoc --all geometry" could open
all PDF files in the directory. A "dtexdoc -all latex" could open all
LaTeX docs (a lot) and a "dtexdoc --all context" could open all the
ConTeXt docs (which have names I always forget).
Just an idea but it might be very comfortable.
More information about the tex-live