Index
> Windows > What help format you prefer and why? |
| What help format you prefer: | ||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| Total Votes : 22 |
| Author |
|
|
JohnFound 25 Dec 2003, 18:23
Please vote in the pole and write short note, why you prefer this format.
Regards. |
|||
25 Dec 2003, 18:23 |
|
|
Kain 25 Dec 2003, 19:38
Flip a coin. They are equally functional. I have no preferrence.
|
|||
|
25 Dec 2003, 19:38 |
|
|
silkodyssey 25 Dec 2003, 20:24
I don't mind hlp format but I prefer chm. I think its looks cleaner than the hlp format and that makes reading it not so much of a chore.
_________________ silkodyssey |
|||
|
25 Dec 2003, 20:24 |
|
|
Betov 25 Dec 2003, 20:28
None. Too slow. Too bad. Too heavy-.
Betov. |
|||
|
25 Dec 2003, 20:28 |
|
|
Madis731 25 Dec 2003, 20:53
Well, when HLP || CHM, then of course, they are about equal, but please don't make it in pdf, and ASCII isn't the best either.
CHM better, 'cuz newer, it has better schrolling options I didn't like the HLP's no-schroll at all option;) |
|||
|
25 Dec 2003, 20:53 |
|
|
Betov 25 Dec 2003, 21:11
John, to me, the problem was as follow:
* Html > Too slow. * Pdf > Terrific (absolutely unusable IMO). * Hlp/Chm > M$. * Ascii > So sad... So, to me, the only way to go was to write a Viewer in Asm. I did a big error, when doing this: The use of standard rtf Files and of RichEdit Functionalities. I will have to redo all of this, when i will have some time, and the new way i am now thinking is with writing an Editor plus a Viewer, with a custom format with the real infos i need inside, for the Viewer. Betov. |
|||
|
25 Dec 2003, 21:11 |
|
|
decard 25 Dec 2003, 21:21
I vote for CHM because of smaller size, and because CHM files can be easily created from HTML.
|
|||
|
25 Dec 2003, 21:21 |
|
|
fasm9 25 Dec 2003, 21:22
Hi,
Betov wrote: The use of standard rtf Files and of RichEdit Functionalities Did you mean .RTF format? Betov wrote: * Hlp/Chm > M$. chm isn't, it is available on linux/unix. http://xchm.sourceforge.net/screenshots.html -- PS: BTW, this is yet another story, i feel the need. we got an assembler(of course, FASM), we got an OS(MenuetOS), now we gonna have to compiler(which is written in FASM; the missing link). so we got a FASM-family.   |
|||
|
25 Dec 2003, 21:22 |
|
|
Czubin 26 Dec 2003, 01:59
common , make something that uses a lot of system resources !!!
i want it to have lots of colors and in different languages !! and plz no pdf format!!!! |
|||
|
26 Dec 2003, 01:59 |
|
|
Kain 26 Dec 2003, 17:28
Betov wrote: John, to me, the problem was as follow: Terrific idea Betov! [don't you just love that multi-purpose word?] I saw the spark of a good idea in Docker but alas, in its current incarnation, it falls short of its MS counterparts. Let us know if you will proceed with this project, I may learn something new. |
|||
|
26 Dec 2003, 17:28 |
|
|
Betov 26 Dec 2003, 17:39
Feel free of writing a better "Docker", or something else, Kain.
Betov. |
|||
|
26 Dec 2003, 17:39 |
|
|
scientica 26 Dec 2003, 21:20
I voted CHM becuase:
btw, RTF, isn't there two RTF formats, the "real" and M$ implentation? Which one is the source of .hlp files? I think CHM is avalible under linux, .hlp isn't supported (unless you play with wine, ofcourse =) The advantage of HTML/XHTML source files is that it can be used for online viewing too, and can (relativley) easily be converted to other formats. _________________ ... a professor saying: "use this proprietary software to learn computer science" is the same as English professor handing you a copy of Shakespeare and saying: "use this book to learn Shakespeare without opening the book itself. - Bradley Kuhn |
|||
|
26 Dec 2003, 21:20 |
|
|
pelaillo 27 Dec 2003, 18:38
I think chm is the right choice because:
1. Available also in Linux 2. It is easy to produce or maintain. 3. It is as light as one wants to do (hand written html of course). 4. Easy to direct web-publishing. 5. It is possible to write a light reader in fasm Betov: I agree with you that current MS reader is crappy and we need to have better technology for help files, but the chm as format is good, what do you think? |
|||
|
27 Dec 2003, 18:38 |
|
|
comrade 27 Dec 2003, 19:32
.HLP is obsolete.
I used to have old computer and chm load very slow, I made habit to use .hlp. Bad habit, use .chm. |
|||
|
27 Dec 2003, 19:32 |
|
< Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|