Documentation format

Sam Pablo Kuper sampablokuper at
Sun Feb 7 11:33:05 CET 2016

On 07/02/16 04:59, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> The problem stems from how orgmode assumes that downstream
> tools can parse UTF-8.

I agree with Daniele's earlier reply. Using Org and LaTeX with UTF-8
would seem to be the best way forward.

>> Also, have you explored alternative pipelines from Org-mode to PDF?
> I tried pandoc, but without good effect.  I haven't explored it further.

If Org export to LaTeX really truly is impossibly buggy, then I
respectfully encourage exploring other Org export paths. Org export to
ODT followed by LibreOffice headless conversion to PDF, for instance.

>> Hm, you think [Texinfo] produces high-quality print output, but you
>> don't like
>> the way it looks on the page. Not a *direct* contradiction, maybe... ;)
> Sure!  I also think Marisa Berenson is the most fashionable woman in the
> world... for 1967. [...] Texinfo looks really
> good for the 1970s, but by current standards it's pretty antiquated.

Thanks, that's clearer now.

> Typography and layout are, believe it or not, user interface issues.

I believe it very strongly. I probably should have been clearer about that.

Specifically, I should have said about typography in the context of
GnuPG documentation, "I'd suggest it isn't top priority," rather than
"I'd suggest it isn't a priority."

I believe that making the content concise, comprehensible and accessible
is the top priority. Improving the appeal and comprehensibility further,
by judicious use of free software typographical tools that other
documentation volunteers will be able to work with in the future, is
probably the next priority after that. More power to your elbow for
taking on the task!

Best wishes, and thanks again for looking into it.

- spk

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list