[ruby-talk:01334] Re: Draft of the updated Ruby FAQ

"Conrad Schneiker" <[e-mail]> writes:

> I finally have a reasonably large block of time to work through this, but as
> I was preparing to retrieve and print the very latest version, I noticed
> that both HTML versions say v2.0, February, 2000, which I'm guessing that
> corresponds to the last modified date on your rubyfaq web page, which may or
> may not always be the case in the future. It's a minor thing, but I always
> appreciate having the detailed last modification date/time on printed
> documents. (I was going to report that the domain/path information was
> missing on your Postscript file link, but I noticed that you have that fixed
> now.)

I wasn't going to start versioning it until it was released - I was
hoping for some form of blessing before I released it on an
unsuspecting world. I also wasn;t sure what we should do about
updates--do I just make changes as I see fit, or does the group get to 
veto things>

> Is there any chance of posting a PDF file in addition to the Postscript
> file? PDF is generally much more convenient for Win 98/NT users (and maybe
> also for many Unix users with Acrobat Reader plug-ins as well too).

Depending on the fonts, I _should_ be able to generate a decent
looking PDF. Before I do that, though, I want to spend time getting it 
to look nicer. And time is something that seems to pass by quicker and 
quicker at the moment. Anyway, I _will_ look at all this sometime next
week. I'll probably also move the faq to it's final resting place.

> (Besides using NT at home, even at official work, I generally prefer to
> access Unix systems through Win NT, and try to print from it when
> possible.

Very sad... ;-)


> I have the previous version of Distiller, so I can produce PDF files from
> Postscript files as a last resort--in fact I'm printing off the PDF version
> as I type.

OK - if I have no luck here I may use you as the FAQtory for pdf.

Thanks

Dave