[WP34S] OT - Fonts in Manual on OS X 10.7.3



#2

Now here is a weird observation for the Mac users out there.

For convenience I prefer to open my PDF documents in Preview. When I open the WP34S Manual, all of those little images emulating the appearance of commands on the dot-matrix display are rendered as grey-scale spectra or smudges, not the correct image.

A stellar example is the table on page 118 of the most recent version of the manual.

Things are rendered correctly when opened in Acrobat Reader under Windows XP or on my BlackBerry PlayBook. I haven't downloaded Acrobat Reader for Mac--I am not particularly fond of it.

I don't recall this when I was dealing with the v. 2.2 manual under Preview.

I am missing some font on my Mac? Did OS X Lion break something?

If anyone else out there sees this, I would be grateful for feedback, or at least validation.

Les


#3

Hmmh, as far as I understand pdf, it should produce a correct image regardless of particular fonts being installed or not. For me, everything looks fine in pdf, but I've got Win 7 here and have the fonts installed, of course. Anyway, the fonts recently employed are found in the sourceforge directory (.otf-files IIRC). It may help to install them, though ...


#4

It does so only with Apple's Preview. It works fine with Adobe's Acrobat Reader.

#5

I noticed this too. Preview isn't dealing with the embedded font properly I suspect.


Quote:
Anyway, the fonts recently employed are found in the sourceforge directory (.otf-files IIRC). It may help to install them, though ...

They are also still changing....


- Pauli


#6

Installing the fonts properly, using the built-in utility Font Book, makes no difference.

Something intrinsic to Preview. The font is embedded and the doc displays fine in Acrobat Reader on the Mac too.

Minor headache. I don't like Acrobat as my PDF viewer, but I can use it for this doc.

Les

#7

How wonderful Apple is...

;)


#8

It's two problems in one:

Firstly, for reasons I do not know, Walter's PDF creation software is unable to embed the OpenType fonts in the output and produces a graphic image instead.

Secondly, Preview seems to choke on the embedded graphics.

If Walter were using OpenOffice.org instead of Word it would be easier to generate the PDFs (complete with table of contents) because it's a built-in feature. Further more, the OpenDocument standard is open as the name suggests and not proprietary as is M$ word. I agree that porting documents over can be a nightmare because OpenOffice.org doesn't interpret all the formatting correctly at times, even with the most recent incarnation of OpenOffice.org. Walter, what PDF generator are you using?


#9

Since other viewers don't "choke" on it, it seems a Preview problem, to me at least... :)

#10

Simply the one implemented in MS Word 2007: <Save as> <pdf document> :-) Did use FreePDF earlier, but experienced hyperlink problems. With several hundred downloads of the manual without complaints so far, the problem of the OP looks like a very special one - and is easily cured by using the Acrobat Reader IMHO.


#11

Ok, here is another report for you.

It does not render correctly on the iPad. Some here, including myself, read most of our calc manuals on the iPad.

Google for "Word 2007 pdf incompatibilities" and you'll find many, including issues with Acrobat Reader.

PDF is about as trouble free as Java or Javascript. It has to be tested on all platforms if you want to attract the widest audience.

I have Acrobat Pro and will gladly render a PDF for you, et al, if you want to send me the .doc file. BTW, I could not find the .doc file on sf.net.


#12

The .DOCs are exclusively in Walter's hands. Ask him why!


#13

Walter, per the GPL (the license WP34s uses on sf.net), I formally request the source code to the PDF.

I am referencing:

  1. The “source code” for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. “Object code” means any non-source form of a work.
  2. You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License
Update, from sf.net:

"By submitting Code to SourceForge.net, you certify that your Code is in compliance with the OSI-Approved or compliant license that you designate"

Edited: 21 Mar 2012, 5:41 p.m.


#14

Egan,

Calm down. Please read page 1 of the manual recently committed (build 2708) d:-)

Best regards,

Walter


#15

Quote:
Calm down.

I was calm.

So all you did was remove the line:

This file is part of WP 34S.
so that you could excluded it from the terms of the GPL?

That is fine moving forward, but I have a copy of your docs covered under the terms of the GPL. My request still stands.

Edited: 22 Mar 2012, 10:24 a.m.


#16

To those who can read: read. To the others ... ?


#17

Walter, what is your point, and why will you not comply to the terms of the GPL that you used until today?

I am trying to help you and the community by creating a PDF document that can be read by all readers.


#18

Egan,

Your will to support is appreciated. Nevertheless, there seems to be a misunderstanding. WP 34S is a software project under GPL, and that SW is fully disclosed for more than 14 months already. As every reasonable product should be, WP 34S is accompanied by a documentation explaining the product to users. It comes without saying that also this documentation (though a minor part of the total) is the result of many hours of work nobody pays. Nowhere is stated that this documentation has to be user-changeable. And I have my reasons why I don't want users editing therein: I have experienced lots of trouble over many years with open documents, so I don't want to see me again repairing things that were alright once already. Neither I want to catch things I released without need - a game you can't win nowadays anymore.

If there should be something wrong with our fonts, we have to solve it ourselves anyway. Any help or observations pointing to the root causes are appreciated. So far, however, 99.x% of the community can read the manual and seem to feel fine with it as is - and we're confident we'll get the other ones satisfied, too. Don't get me wrong, but a problem affecting 0.x% of the community using a rare combination of SW instead of a well established standard has another impact than a function returning wrong results for all. Hope I didn't exaggerate too much ;-)

Best regards,
Walter


#19

Quote:
Nowhere is stated that this documentation has to be user-changeable.

In fact I've never seen any GPL freeware project that comes with a 'source' (DOC?) of the included PDF manual/documentation.

#20

That's because most or many use troff, perldoc, or latex, etc... formats and render the PDFs, as well as HTML versions, etc...


#21

You wrote that you have Adobe Acrobat Pro. I always thought that the commercial version of Acrobat would allow to modify (and re-render) any PDF document, doesn't it?


#22

It does and I tried. To "fix" Walter's document I have to enable transparency, but then I lose the links. (Walter reported a similar problem with another PDF tool.) I am not an Acrobat Pro expert. I mostly use it to OCR, crop, and straighten scanned documents.

#23

Adobe Acrobat Pro is not a document editor, like Word, that can change and manipulate fonts, bookmarks etc. It can only work with fonts that are aleady defined and inluded in the PDF or make links in an existing PDF manually. And if the originator of the work happened to use protected fonts or settings that allowed only font subsets, then you're really limited. To re-do a document properly you really need to do it from the source file.

Edited: 23 Mar 2012, 9:45 a.m.


#24

Actually, you can do editing with Acrobat Pro (at least the old version 5 that I have). It is abysmally slow and annoying to change very much, though! I HAVE changed fonts in some documents. I think (a bit hazy here, since it has been a few years) the fonts that you can use have to be part of whatever font licensing there is within/between Adobe and whoever owns the fonts.


#25

Indeed you can do *some* editing, e.g. search and replace words. Each line of text is fixed, it will not re-flow when sentence lengths change. You could overwrite (read: cover) a paragraph with a text box, but what pain is that?

You are right, one can indeed change fonts with many that you have on you PC. However, even after editing, re-saving the document seldom solves the original problem. I actually had a similar problem with a PDF recently that displayed blank pages in the reader, but showed up fine in the Pro. No amount of changing & re-saving helped. I eventually re-printed to third party free PDF printer which solved the problem but ended up in a much bigger file size.

#26

Quote:
In fact I've never seen any GPL freeware project that comes with a 'source' (DOC?) of the included PDF manual/documentation.

Franz,

I actual fact I have seen open source projects where the documentation is not even in PDF, but in an editor format and contribution to the documentation is actively encouraged.
#27

Quote:
Nowhere is stated that this documentation has to be user-changeable.

Right here in your pre-March 22 2012 PDF:
Quote:
This file is part of WP 34S.
WP 34S is free software: you can redistribute it and / or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

I cannot think of another bit of open source software where the documentation included with the software is not also covered under the same license. I looks like to me you also used the GPL for your documentation until today. Your older works are still under the GPL. You cannot rewrite history.
Quote:
And I have my reasons why I don't want users editing therein: I have experienced lots of trouble over many years with open documents, so I don't want to see me again repairing things that were alright once already. Neither I want to catch things I released without need - a game you can't win nowadays anymore.

Making the source available does not give anybody access or permission to change the original. I did not ask for SVN commit access or your PC password. You are the owner of the document, you have the final say what goes in or is taken out. You can simple ignore any and all contributions. But under the GPL, you must make the source available.
Quote:
Don't get me wrong, but a problem affecting 0.x% of the community using a rare combination of SW instead of a well established standard has another impact than a function returning wrong results for all. Hope I didn't exaggerate too much ;-)

You do, and are misinformed. Your document is not readable on the iPad, it is the #1 tablet on the market and is not considered "rare". Using your logic, I have 100s, possibly 1000s of PDF documents that render on OS/X Preview and the iPad with only one exception--your document. So, it must be your issue, not mine. I hope I didn't exaggerate too much. :-)

#28

It's obviously not math we are discussing. You have to admit there are at least two opinions about disclosing documentation sources. Please see the other post above (not mine) as well.

IMHO, you should be grateful you may observe development as close as in this project. We could as well shut up and just publish a new release every x months if you prefer.

But you're right eventually: You and we agree it's our issue, not yours. Period.


#29

Quote:
IMHO, you should be grateful you may observe development as close as in this project. We could as well shut up and just publish a new release every x months if you prefer.

IMHO, you should be grateful that there is a community that uses your project, debugs it, tests it, contributes to it, raves about it, votes on it, and yes, also complains about it.

IMHO, your tone in this thread and others generally is, "so what". I am not the only that has tried to help with the documentation or has expressed an interested in contributing.

BTW, your release cycle is nothing new. I can checkout the SVN of any active open source project and "observe" it's development. And I am grateful that the 34S source code is open. Paul, Marcus, et al. Thanks!


#30

Quote:
Quote:
IMHO, you should be grateful you may observe development as close as in this project. We could as well shut up and just publish a new release every x months if you prefer.

IMHO, you should be grateful that there is a community that uses your project, debugs it, tests it, contributes to it, raves about it, votes on it, and yes, also complains about it.

We are :-) Though, as you know, that wasn't the cause why we started: we (two) wanted a calculator for our own use - we wanted to show a serious scientific calc is viable - and if anybody else would like it, fine. Nevertheless, we appreciate your (pl.) tips and contributions, we even asked for your (pl.) votes and complaints. If you (pl.) want anything particular included, step up and suggest - the odds are high (but <100%!) we (three) accept and implement it, be it in SW or documentation. Our reaction times are short as proven here many times, and the overall success of WP 34S benefitted from your (pl.) accepted contributions. Thanks!

For the record: Doc-wise there were two or so requests to write a completely different manual IIRC. At least one asked for the original text (strange: if anybody wants to write something completely different, why does he need a master? :-? ). Although we had one chapter of the source text in SVN for many weeks, we never heard anything in this matter again. That's our experience in this sector so far.

So, I hope it's all explained now. Sometimes, the tone may echo the one called in - sorry, we are only humans as well. Maybe the result is not what you (sg.) wanted - then please accept it or demonstrate you can do better.

#31

Quote:
You have to admit there are at least two opinions about disclosing documentation sources. Please see the other post above (not mine) as well.

Not really. fhub stated that he has not seen the .DOC of other GPL software. That is because GPL software generally does not use proprietary formats such as Word for documentation. Refer to the entire GNU project and the Linux kernel as examples of that.

#32

Quote:
fhub stated that he has not seen the .DOC of other GPL software.

Compare fhub's post above. I leave it to the audience to assess your statement here.

#33

Walter and Egan,

A lot of IMHO's when in fact it is obvious there's no humbleness in your opinions.

Although I agree with Egan, it is obvious that Walter is determined and stubborn and will not release the manual source file - perhaps the users should write their own manual.


#34

Quote:
...perhaps the users should write their own manual.

Steve Simpkin and I started a "community" wiki based Users Manual written and formatted more like a typical HP calculator manual. We posted several requests for volunteers to contribute but got no bites:

http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/wp34s/index.php?title=Main_Page

We also started to move it to wiki4hp:
http://wiki4hp.com/doku.php?id=34s:online_manual

#35

Bart,

Quote:
Although I agree with Egan, it is obvious that Walter is determined and stubborn and will not release the manual source file - perhaps the users should write their own manual.

Please let me ask for an English lesson: You wrote 'Although ...'. I don't understand this word in this context. There may be a negation missing, but that's only guessing. Oh, and thanks for your kind words - we've solved the problem in the meantime ;-)

TIA for enlightenment,
Walter


#36

The negation is there: the word "not".


From an English Grammar book:

"We can use 'although' to introduce a contrast". I am guessing that this contrast is the negation you are looking for.


My affirmation is: "I agree with Egan" (that the source document should be released with the other source files).
The contrast is: "Walter will not release the source document".
So: "Although I agree with Egan, Walter will not release the source document" (I just added some adjectives about Walter in the previous post).


Now:
Let me make it clear that I in no way wish to trivialise the effort you put into the documentation. I write a lot of it and know the effort it takes. I also know that the time that the WP-34s team put into this project is precious. It is appreciated.

#37

Quote:
Compare fhub's post above. I leave it to the audience to assess your statement here.

I have replied to that twice. There are no .DOC files for GPL software because .DOC format is not used. Other (open) formats are used to render the PDF and the source is included.

Walter, do your own homework.


#38

Quote:
Walter, do your own homework.

We did, Egan :-> While you were complaining, we solved the root cause. So, you may continue or not ...

#39

Quote:
we solved the root cause

Actually you didn't. You're the root cause. Next time there is a problem, we will have this debate again.

You need to re-read the above threads more carefully. You were leaning on another's inaccurate assessment of the source of .pdf files in GPL software. That is what I was referring to when I told you to do your own homework.

To summarize:

  1. You do not want to release the source of the documentation for fear of losing control. I suggested that you do not need to allow others to submit changes. And, in releasing the source others can help you with rendering problems and porting to other platforms/readers. You have not provided a valid argument as to why not do this. You will not lose control. I think the real issue is that you fear derivative works.
  2. You refuse to comply to the terms of the GPL that until recently you had, by design or error, released the documentation under.
  3. You do not understand how most GPL documentation is managed and released.
  4. I firmly believe that if it was not for this debate you would have stood on your initially assessment that it's the user's problem, and to use a PDF reader that is considered a "standard".
Walter, your documentation is quiet good. Allowing others to assist you may or may not improve it. But we will never know unless you are willing to give up a bit of control.

P.S. Thanks for fixing this minor problem.

#40

Quote:
It does not render correctly on the iPad. Some here, including myself, read most of our calc manuals on the iPad.

I use a Sony Reader and a Samsung Galaxy Note. On them both this document renders just fine...


#41

That's great.

I use Goodreader on the iPad and with the exception of this document there isn't a single PDF I have had an issue with in the last two years. 100's of PDFs without issue.


#42

Allright Egan, did you check this list? Maybe the answer is there...

Greetings,
Massimo


#43

The only possible solution based on that link is to include fonts in the PDF file. Something I could easily do, iff I had the the WP34s (a GPLv3 open source project) documentation source.

#44

See if this works for you:

http://sense.net/~egan/Manual_wp_34s_3_0b.pdf

#45

The font problems with Windows, Word and the resulting PDF seem to be sorted out. I've recreated the fonts with FontForge in TrueType format and Walter has updated his installation accordingly. The resulting PDF looks fine on my Mac with Preview. The new Manual is in SVN but I will update SF shortly. We have to debug a few things before we can put up the next release.

The reason that I had created the fonts as OpenType Adobe fonts was that my Mac obviously didn't like the TrueType fonts I had originally created. OpenType seemed to work fine in both Windows and on the Mac. Obviously there is an exception...


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Writing RPL programs on OS X Sean Freeman 18 775 11-30-2013, 03:59 PM
Last Post: Sean Freeman
  Shutdown with the Apps key and more than 10 variables in a program. Davi Ribeiro de Oliveira 10 557 11-05-2013, 01:26 PM
Last Post: Han
  Blurred fonts on the Prime hugh steers 23 961 10-31-2013, 05:46 PM
Last Post: BruceH
  Updated PPC DVD Version 2.10: HP-41 Searchable Program Files and Scannable Barcode Jake Schwartz 3 251 09-27-2013, 09:51 PM
Last Post: Olivier (Wa)
  Rounding of 10^x Olivier De Smet 8 311 08-28-2013, 06:33 AM
Last Post: Dieter
  HP-fonts - Where can I found? Csaba Tizedes (Hungary) 4 273 08-23-2013, 05:01 PM
Last Post: Csaba Tizedes (Hungary)
  Typo in wp34s PRINTED manual (not pdf) Barry Mead 3 205 08-05-2013, 04:21 PM
Last Post: Walter B
  Typo in wp34s Manual Barry Mead 12 436 07-23-2013, 07:23 AM
Last Post: Paul Dale
  wp34s Manual Page Reference Barry Mead 1 167 07-23-2013, 07:13 AM
Last Post: Walter B
  Pilbox speedup on Mac OS X Håkan Thörngren 1 157 06-07-2013, 03:27 PM
Last Post: Egan Ford

Forum Jump: