-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Have a readable version of the form text available regardless of builds, artifacts, systems #13
Comments
Sure, I'll leave it open until we have a solution in #1. |
@fulldecent do you know how hard it is to generate MarkDown files from LaTeX? I'd like to put together a simple build script that generates the various formats from the LaTeX directly to ensure that we don't accidentally have different files with different wording. |
@ckaran - the Makefile in form266 branch supports this from the merged PR but for further reference
|
@enckse my apologies, I didn't see it. Unfortunately, I've managed to slightly hose my machine, so I can't test it at the moment. I'll put together a virtual machine to test it out at some point. |
Understandable, I think the "real issue" is actually #27 in which I just need to know how/where we should communicate these things :) |
@ckaran The pandoc command from @enckse is exactly what I use, or something like
|
@fulldecent I understand, and I didn't mean to imply that I didn't think it worked, I just wanted to test it and watch the output myself. That way I can help work on the form too; at the moment I'm kind of hamstrung. |
I think this may be the original intent of #1 by @marctjones (though I'm not necessarily speaking on behalf of anyone but myself) but that issue (#1) how now become a technical discussion which in the noise has lost an important point which is:
There should be a way to view the form text without a hard requirement on Adobe, Windows, DoD Certs, etc. Whether that is via an extraction from a PDF, building from plain text/latex/etc. and producing a PDF and markdown, or something else - being able to see what the agreement and text is without immediately being restricted down a tool chain (as mentioned above) would be ideal.
Since #1 has become a very technical thing at this point, I would say if possible we should leave this one open unless #1 is fixes and resolves it somehow (e.g. tex, markdown, etc.). This is probably a duplicate of #1 given all things but for clarity sake doing something that isn't the traffic on #1 would help - if we can keep this ticket without technical dumpings of the file and dev notes we're probably better off.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: