[Gzz] Re: Is xupdf reasonable?!

[Tuomas Lukka]

On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:02:25AM +0200, Matti Katila wrote:
> 
> [The subject was only considerer to wake you up ;) ]
> 
> Subject: [Gzz-commits] manuscripts/xupdf article.rst                          
>                               
> Module name:    manuscripts
> Changes by:     Janne V. Kujala <address@hidden>    03/01/27 02:25:19
> Log message:    link direction/type issue
> 
> diff -u manuscripts/xupdf/article.rst:1.25 
> @@ -57,6 +57,12 @@
>    It could be argued that more variation in the directions would 
>    yield more visual features for distinguishing between different links.
> 
> +- Do we differentiate between different link types/directions such as
> +       - left-right
> +       - past-future
> +       - source-referer
> +       - created by document author/user?
> 
> 
> Well, Janne noticed that there's a lot of things influenced to 
> bidirectional links and left/rigth direction.
> 
> Basically xupdf is pdf viewer and what we have? Only UI with links.
> Even bib entrys have more information than xupdf has in links. 
> 
> There isn't way to tell to user: "Mmmkay, this is referred from this 
> article". We can only say that there exist a link between articles.
> OTOH, we can not say that article refers to another or have we made the 
> link ourselfs.

These are very good points, and we do need to address them before 
the article deadline.

1) The idea is that the user can also write short notes and link them.
   This way, the link types should become more apparent. I'll be implementing
   this ASAP.

2) At least my view of xupdf so far is that it's more for "personal" use,
   so that you know the articles you're browsing.

> This mail's purpose was to raise conversation about xupdf and the issues 
> involved to it.

That's very good - we really need that.

        Tuomas