Help talk:Print versions

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Problem with step by step

If you do the following:

4. Insert every chapter like a template, preceded by chapter title. Remember about chapter with list of authors.

   = Chapter name =
   Book/Chapter name

And the chapter already includes the chapter name then in the contents menu on the print version the chapter's name will appear twice, one as a subtitle of the other.

Doesn't this need to be changed? Glich (talk) 16:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Deeper explanation of "Creating separate page for print version" required?

Could someone take some time to provide a more in depth explanation of the steps needed in the section "Creating separate page for print version". For example, step 3 mentions "Copy the TOC as an ordered list". Does this mean just the text on the web page as I see it, or the wikitext or html code which is behind the TOC? I looked at the proposed reference work (Python Programming) but don't quite understand whether they created their TOC, or whether there is a way for wikibooks to create it for me that I am supposed to use.

Can someone provide some clarification? Many thanks. --Codinghead (talk) 11:18, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright inclusion

In Ada Programming we already have a "print version" in Ada Programming/All Chapters so I followed the additional recomendations and have added the template and included the GFDL text. I wonder whether this last inclusion is really necessary; it adds too much text to the page and what is worst, it adds the page to the Category:Wikibooks enforced policies. Could an administrator at least use the noinclude tag around the category? Otherwise we need other method for including the GFDL text. ManuelGR 20:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, done, adding noinclude helped.
About GFDL problem: yes, it is strictly required that any print version of text under GFDL license has full text of the license. In fact, we should also include it in all our pages, but we "cheat" a bit by providing only link to the license text. Yes, GFDL is a stupid license, but unfortunately when Wikibooks were created there was no better alternative (like CC-BY-SA license). It's too late to change anything so we are stick to GFDL forever. Remember, when you create your own wiki, never ever use GFDL, maybe except dual-licensing ;-) --Derbeth talk 22:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I reread the license and I don't think we are cheating since we follow the requirements of section titled GNU Free Documentation License#6. COLLECTIONS OF DOCUMENTS. Actually I don't see any problem on using the GFDL for a wiki. ManuelGR 23:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Automatic generation of print version pages from a navigational map

Take a look at m:User:Nigelk/Nav and m:User:Nigelk/ConcatPages. This extension could be used to keep the TOC of the book synchronized with the print version. This extension also automatically adds next/up/previous links to the pages listed in the TOC page, aka nav map. ManuelGR 20:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No Print Question

If I do the following:

To prevent block of text from being printed, cover it with <div class="noprint"> ... </div>.

and the block of text contains a header. Is there a way to also not show the header in the TOC?

Try <noinclude> ... </noinclude> It solved some problems for me Pluke 14:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion of Module Sections?

Is there a way to link a module's section from the print version's page, but not include the entire module as well? I was thinking about creating an Endnotes page for some books instead of having footnotes at the end of each chapter. I tried {{:Book/Module#SectionName}}, but no luck. --Everlong 23:28, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Not quite sure what, precisely, you're asking. If you want to include only parts of the module in the "all-pages" version, you can use the <noinclude> tag to mark the parts that you don't want included. If you want all the endnotes included, you may have to make each module's endnote section a seperate page and include it both at the end of each module as well as in the "all-pages" endnote page. --Swift 18:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Patent and PDF

I noticed that PDF is the file type of choice. Due to the various patents surrounding this format, it should be avoided. Wikimedia takes a stance against similar formats such as MP3, AVI and, to a lesser extent, GIF/JPG. How about promoting the use of ODF and other unencumbered (but equally powerful) formats? --OldakQuill 15:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

AFAIK JPG cannot be substituted and I haven't heard of any instructions from any Wikimedia project to avoid JPG files. Currently, PDF is the only reasonable publication format: it can be viewed in various web browsers and operating systems. I don't see any alternative and in my opinion it's not Wikimedia Foundation role to promote free software and new standards. --Derbeth talk 17:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not simply talking about advocacy. Patents often put a burden on Wikimedians to pay various companies whenever they create a file in a patented format. This is precisely the reason why we do not allow MP3 files. ODF is a very viable, flexible alternative. PNG can be used in the place of most JPG files. --OldakQuill 12:39, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Certainly I'm all in favor of open file formats, including the w:OpenDocument format (ODF) developed by OASIS. Certainly *some* patent holders require a license fee to use their license. However, the wikipedia article on pdf w:pdf claims that PDF is also an open file format. Also, according to the wikipedia article on pdf, "Anyone may create applications that read and write PDF files without having to pay royalties to Adobe Systems; Adobe holds a number of patents relating to PDF but licenses them royalty-free for use in developing software that complies with its PDF specification."
Likewise, since the LZW patent has expired, w:GIF is now a open file format (and free). But PNG is technically superior to GIF, even if it is no longer "morally" superior, so I still recommend converting all GIFs to PNG.
I don't know enough about ODF vs PDF to know whether one is technically superior to another. But it seems reasonable to me for ODF advocates to post ODF versions, so that users have a choice of viewing a Wikibook in HTML/XHTML, PDF, or ODF.
--DavidCary 04:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don't over complicate task of book making

I can understand the open source community has its roots in programming but word processing is a common thing. You don't need to use a programming language to make pdfs or even E-books the programming has already been done for you from many many sources. If you can have an HTML page you can make it into an RTF page, if you can make it into an RTF page you can edit it in any number of word processing programs and print it out into PDF form or MSReader form or Palm Doc form. I've done all this countless times. I've taken text files off of Gutenberg.org and done everything from making them into paperbacks you can hold in your hand to e-books for e-readers -- ALL FROM COMMONLY AVAILABLE PROGRAMS (pardom my volume) -- MSWord and WordPerfect being the most common. The point is DON'T set it up as a specialist's task but one countless people can accomplish from their home computers. ALL the Wikibooks should be available in downloadable format. Infact MULTIPLE formats ... HTML, palm Doc, MSWord Doc, MSReader, PDF and whatever else format is requested. Set a place where the source text is available for book makers and you'll get them back from home book makers as quick as you can write or devise them. -- Thank you. JN

[edit] Print version tag prints!

I have including the {{Print version}} tag on the A-level Computing page, as I am trying out the print version to see how it looks (no where near finished i know!). However the tag appears on the printed version, A-level Computing/Print version. Using the div noprint tag doesn't get rid of it!?! any suggestions Pluke 14:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

SolvedTry <noinclude> ... </noinclude> Pluke 14:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More tips on PDF creation

Can you explain me, step by step, how do you create PDF files from print versions? I tried method described in Wikibooks:Print versions#PDF versions but it did not work. I was saving true print version (without navigation bar, print version notice and so on) as HTML file with images using Opera, Firefox and Internet Explorer and opening them as HTML file in OpenOffice.org 2.0.2 and Microsoft Word 2003. None of these combinations worked. The thing I got in word processor was text with print version notice, section edit links and so on. --Derbeth talk 14:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I save articles as "Web page complete". MS Word displays the files properly for me (looking like the Print Version) provided they are small (under 50 pages). Larger files may need breaking into parts for viewing. Recently I have used Wordpad to "top and tail" the files before viewing. I remove all the unnecessary code before the BODY tag and after the end of text, before the /BODY tag. I just stick the standard HTML HEAD /HEAD sequence in front of the BODY tag.
Once the file has been saved as a word processor file it looks like the Print Version but does have irritating additions such as section templates still in place. I chop off the Print Version heading and any Table of Contents and use recorded macros in Word to cut out all the repeating elements that are not needed such as "edit" links and templates. I then page through the whole file looking for headings that have the wrong 'level', links that are incorrect and missing graphics. If there is a missing graphic I go to the online version and copy and paste the graphic into place. Once the text looks OK I insert a Cover Page and Table of Contents at the start. The whole process takes about 45 minutes for a 200 page book so it is a labour of love if you are a busy person. Once the Word Document is complete I print it to file using PDF Creator and upload.
Some books make Word 'hang' when you try to view them as HTML. The only way round this (that I have found) is to chop them into pieces, top and tail the small files with HTML tags and combine them in Word. RobinH 09:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] How to stop template appearing in print version

How can I stop a navigational template from appearing in a print version? Poppy 15:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

there are a number of ways to go about doing this, although the nuances can be tricky. The easiest way to stop something from appearing in a print version is to surround the text of the navigational aide in <div class="noprint"> ... </div> tags. The templates will still appear on the print version page, but will not appear on the paper when you print it. If you need a better solution, let me know. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 21:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


An other solution is <noinclude>{{Tempalte}}</noinclude>.
-- MichaelFrey 15:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks it worked. Poppy 15:23, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Something that editors may find useful

To create manual page breaks in the print version, use {{Print version page break}}. According to an HTML comment inside the template, it only works in Firefox. JeremyMcCracken (talk) 21:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MediaWiki to LaTeX conversion for printing

I've written a MediaWiki to LaTeX conversion script that ties into the ExportPDF extension to produce high-quality PDF documents on the fly from Mediawiki pages. There are also a set of templates that go with the script to allow index generation, references, citations, abstracts, epigraphs, equations and figures. There is preliminary support for fairly complicated markup like the <gallery> tag, which is converted into floating subfigures, and tables, which are converted into floating tables inside of figures. I'm still working on bibliographies and style sheets.

It is still very much in beta, but I hope that it proves useful for other users.

Hudson (talk) 17:19, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Move to the Help namespace

I propose we move this page to the Help namespace. It is, in essence, a page helping users get a task done on Wikibooks, not about the Wikibooks site or community. (I'm not being bold since page moves aren't trivial to revert) --Swift (talk) 03:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Swift (talk) 08:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] move to Using Wikibooks

I propose we move this page (again), making it a module of the "Using Wikibooks" book. Would "Using Wikibooks/Print versions" be appropriate? --DavidCary (talk) 15:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Help_talk:Print_versions"