How To ...

For what it’s worth, here’s an updated (but simple) guide on ‘How To …’ with RISC OS.

Comments welcome.

On Printing….

Not sure why your opening paragraph explains character-based printing when your conclusion is that it’s no longer supported. Why not just skip that?

Installing a printer needs a few more steps illustrated. Also, is it as simple as choosing your USB printer and selecting USB for the connection method? It’s a while since I set up a printer on RISC OS, but I seem to remember that USB would only work if the printer was recognised, and then it automatically popped up. The alternative was fiddly. I suspect this is still an issue as I cannot choose USB for one of the printers I have installed on my Iyonix at present. (I am on 5.16 though.)

Might be worth mentioning GutenPrint on this page as if people obtain that it can save a lot of grief. Also mention !PrintPDF as for some users that will be the best alternative to getting real printers set up for RISC OS.

I like the style of the guide, by the way, though opening it on a RISC OS machine is a bit confusing at first, especially as it happens to have the same backdrop texture as my Iyonix.

On Saving…

It’s a little misleading under how to save to say that the user can click the Menu button and there will be a Save option. Sometimes it is under a “File” submenu (e.g. Fireworkz) and in fact that is the Style Guide recommendation though it never really caught on.

Also, it is wrong in general to say that you can click on the Save option from the menu. Some applications do absolutely nothing if you do this. Most will probably save the file to the location it was loaded from, if it was loaded from disc, but a few do not open up the save dialogue if the file is a new one with no save location.

Yes, that method works in EasiWriter, Draw, Edit, ArtWorks, ProCAD+ and NetSurf. It does not work in Messenger and PrivateEye, for example. Might be worth saying that moving the mouse further to the right will open the dialogue box most reliably.

It would also be well worth emphasising the fact that you need to get the destination filer window open first, otherwise you’ll end up typing in the filename and have nowhere to put it, and frustratingly the window may will forget the name you picked when you reopen it having got your filer window ready in the meantime.

It would be good to mention here there possibility of dragging to a disc icon on the iconbar to save to the root of the drive. I find that particularly useful with the RAM disc, and it can be handy otherwise if you have forgotten to open your filer window first.

Also, good to mention dragging direct to another application on the icon bar, or to a document window to insert the content into another application (or indeed, the same application). As this is one of the key benefits of RISC OS it really needs to be promoted in the guide. Some pictures would be good on this page too.

Write my own programmes…..

This page is very BASIC focussed, and uses a method of editing and running BASIC I have never met before. Might be worth saying you can edit BASIC in Edit, StrongEd and Zap too? These editors are rather more intuitive in how they operate, so less of a learning curve for newcomers. (Can’t rmemeber which of those three are bundled with the Raspberry Pi image.)

Obviously you cannot cover all languages on this page, but it would be good to give hyperlinks to places where people can get more information on programming RISC OS in C (e.g. GCC and Norcroft), Perl, Lua, etc. Also, brief pointers to where to get PRM documents, fuller how-to guides available on the web etc. Some of that is covered in the Manuals section on the sidebar, but I did not spot that to start with. Best to duplicate or highlight those links in the text of the “how to programme” page.

While we’re here, the lack of scroll bar in the left column means it is unusable on anything “small”. For instance, a Beagle or Pi with analogue output, perhaps an HDMI→VGA in a lower resolution to an older monitor, and in my case an eeePC with 1024×600 display – it cuts off at the “Hardware” title.

Excellent feedback, thanks. Now to do a bit of editing….

How to find a programme
Write my own programmes

If you’re doing a bit of editing, perhaps correcting the spelling of program while you’re there? A computer runs a program, what I’m doing tomorrow is a programme of events.

The rest of it looked good!

I second this. The distinction between program and programme is worth retaining and has been around for half a century, even though few journalists seem to know it.

I think you will find that ‘program’ is an American spelling of the word ‘programme’ (and is so described in my dictionary). All the other suggestions are included (apart from some pictures which I’m working on). Not entirely happy about describing how to install a USB printer because that seems to be quite difficult – it’s a long time ago and I recall that my USB to parallel cable didn’t pop up quite as easily as the ‘Welcome’ guide describes…

Regarding the scroll bar, I have added ‘scrolling=auto’ rather than scrolling=no and this seems to work on NetSurf and IE but seems to be ignored by Firefox 22 (the one with the fox f*rting onto an overheated tablet).

Write my own programmes…

I think you should mention GCC for RISC OS as it gives free C and C++ compilers. See http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCC.

Also on the riscos.info site it may be worth mentions the packages page (http://www.riscos.info/index.php/Packages) which has links to many C and C++ libraries compiled for use with GCC on RISC OS.

Programme is simply the English spelling, program is the American spelling of the same thing. I have never been able to understand why so many people use the American spelling; the British have more claim to having originated programming than the Americans.

you should mention GCC for RISC OS

Done.

The reason people use different spellings is to distinguish the two very different usages.

“Is it in the programme?” and “Is it in the program?” are very different, though whether the “programme” is on the TV or on the TV depends somewhat on whether you still have a CRT set.

Programme is simply the English spelling, program is the American spelling of the same thing.

It’s worth following the link I added to the OED which seemed pretty clear on the matter: program is the american spelling of programme (in the context of events planned in the future), whereas program in the context of computing is the same in both english and US english.

While in the office I’m sitting near a paper dictionary (1997 edition Collins), page 1068 is also clear that computers run programs based on it being in bold rather than italics, and distinct from the entry on programme further down the page.

My (1988) Collins says ‘program (sometimes programme)’ both in bold. I was taught to use ‘programme’ and so I do. I was also taught not to use intransitive verbs transitively and vice versa. Also not to use ‘fast’ as an adverb except where it means fixed. A careful pedant is a better pedant.

I was taught to use ‘programme’ and so I do.

While I, and others, was taught to use “program”. Actually, I was taught “program” by a pedant so anal he would actually have us write corrections in textbooks for misplaced punctuation. [<sarcasm>he loved my habit of nested brackets in writing!</sarcasm>]

To be honest, instead of railing against this, it might be better to think of it as offering a richness to English English. This isn’t so much a word stolen from Americans, as it is a similar word used to describe a different concept without needing to waste time/effort/letters specifying in detail what you meant (ie “computer programme” → “program”).

Also not to use ‘fast’ as an adverb except where it means fixed.

I had to think about that. You mean like “it is stuck fast”? I had to think because that is a rather non-obvious use of the word fast – instead of, say, “fast relief from headaches” or “damn, that’s a fast bowl, we didn’t even see the wickets blown to smithereens!”.
It’s a shame that there isn’t a vote in this forum, because it would be interesting to see how many others associate fast with speed and quickness; despite it having a plethora of meanings – for instance Muslims are currently having a fast during daytime hours¹, your example of stuck fast (which is so non-intuitive I bet it causes no end of fun to non-native English speakers (kind of how I think of the phrase “brake horse power”²)). Then there’s the other meaning, as in “she was a fast woman”. And, my favourite, “fast asleep”, which does not imply time or quickness but rather a depth of sleeping that you could march by a brass band atop an elephant and… the person wouldn’t wake.
³

A careful pedant is a better pedant.

Which is more important, the correctness of the medium, or the message it imparts? In this case, you may feel that “programme” is correct, however if the majority are used to seeing “program”, then adding the “me” will add to their confusion.
When I was doing my how-to-install-RISC-OS-on-a-Pi video, I specifically and intentionally did not refer to ‘!’ as a pling. Partly this is because I never knew of “pling” until I got into the Acorn scene, so I think of “exclamation-boot” and “exclamation-edit”, but mostly because pling is a regional word only understood by a specific dialects of English, and not everybody at that. I could have said “bang-boot”⁴ and “bang-edit”. The correct name of the symbol is “exclamation mark”, so that’s what I went with. Understandable to everybody.

¹ Not an adverb, but it’s (yet another) meaning of “fast”.

² Horse power is what makes you go, brakes are what make you stop, so brake horse power is… how much you have to floor the accelerator while the brakes are applied before your brake pads catch fire?

³ I don’t think I’m doing badly for a person who went to school with half the class having moderate to severe reading difficulties – some could only follow a sentence if the words were in colour. I have to actually stop and think when you say adverb. Is that a “doing word” or an “action word” or… oh, right, it’s a green word… A worrying number left school unable to remember the context of a sentence because by the time they’ve reached the end (syllable by syllable) they don’t remember the start. ⁵

⁴ I reckon ‘*’ is more bang-like than ‘!’.

⁵ It must suck not to be able to read.

non-obvious use of the word fast – instead of, say, “fast relief from headaches” or “damn, that’s a fast bowl, we didn’t even see the wickets blown to smithereens!”.

those uses are adjectives and are thus correct. Fast as an adverb is (allegedly) wrong – ‘quickly’ is a suitable alternative.

Anyway I’m only objecting to editing something that is correct (even if archaic). I’m not bothered about ‘fast’ really either but anything to get comments on the ‘HowTo’ page as I’m keen to improve it.

the British have more claim to having originated programming than the Americans

Well, that depends on which camp you fall into:

• Mrs Lovelace is a delusional nutter who had some of Babbages “programs” printed under her name. [“programs” in quotes because no Difference Engine existed at the time, so the “programs” remaining untested]

or:

• Mrs Lovelace is so freakin’ awesome it defies belief. Not only did she fully understand what programming is, but she deeply understood the difference engine, and such concepts as the difference between the instructions (operations) and the data (variables), how to break complex maths down into sequences of simpler maths, leading her to write what is widely considered to be the first computer program, working at bare metal level without luxuries like compilers and O’Reilly guides. She also foresaw uses for the machine beyond the scope of boring maths. The first Girl Geek, and how… (^_^)

Anyway I’m only objecting to editing something that is correct (even if archaic). I’m not bothered about ‘fast’ really either but anything to get comments on the ‘HowTo’ page as I’m keen to improve it.

Don’t use archaic phrasing :-)

BTW. I was under the impression that Collins was considered to be less authoritative than the OED.

This appears to be something of a novel situation – computer savvy bods arguing about spelling and word use. It would be a major revelation at work.

My personal justification for ‘program’ over ‘programme’ is that the former is more commonly used by people who know what they’re talking about, and the latter is more commonly used by people who don’t have a clue. Therefore, if you use ‘programme’, I have a statistical reason not to pay attention to you.

Brake horse power. Power required to stop the engine accelerating. It varies with the crankshaft’s angular velocity (rpm)

Regarding the scroll bar, I have added ‘scrolling=auto’ rather than scrolling=no and this seems to work on NetSurf and IE but seems to be ignored by Firefox 22 (the one with the fox f*rting onto an overheated tablet).

I’m using Firefox 3.something. I got sick of the crazy version numbers. Are we up to 22 now? WTF?

Anyway. Cloned parts of your site offline and had a hack. Technically Firefox is right, the others are broken.

You see, the best I could do with forced scrollbars is inactive ones. It comes down to this:

• In Nav.htm, in the CSS def for #navigation, get rid of the "position: fixed; part. You are essentially telling the browser not to allow the navigation position to be altered – W3Schools defines this as “The element is positioned relative to the browser window”. Technically, this should also include scrolling. Fixed means fixed. No exceptions. ;-)

• In HowTo.htm, you currently have scrolling=“no” for the frame in question. Alter this to scrolling=“auto”. Tested with Firefox 3.something using a long and a short version of the Nav frame.

• The DTD for HTML 3.2 is, correctly, "<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN">". The version without “Final” is unofficial. However, this is moot because…

• TECHNICALLY no browser should render your document correctly AT ALL. You are using XHTML-like tag endings (the “/>”), advanced CSS, and frames and you are calling your document HTML 3.2…
  If a browser was to obey you literally, it would show the user the text “Your browser does not show frames: you need a browser which can show frames to view this page.”.

Here’s what to do:

1. Your DTD should be "<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Frameset//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/frameset.dtd">". Nothing else.
2. Get rid of the three XHTML style /> closings. This is not XHTML.
3. The part frameborder="0" framespacing="0" border="0" might be better done in CSS? W3Schools says frameborder exists, the W3C validator disagrees. However framespacing and border are not valid for a frame definition. [take them out, see if it makes any difference to anything…?]
4. The frame definition resize=“no” should be noresize. Yes, it is annoying when some HTML attributes take parameters and some don’t. ;-)
5. No character set definition. As it is for RISC OS, stick this line inside the head section after the title: <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
6. The <noframes> section should go inside the frame. Place it in between the two closing </frameset> tags.

Then give it a whirl on http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.svrsig.org%2FHowTo.htm&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=1

Please don’t think I’m nit-picking. Browsers tend to be very liberal and forgiving (well, considering numerous WYSIWYG HTML editors create abysmal markup (example)), however there are a few fundamental problems to see to, which is why I wrote so much. :-)

[update: fixed a lot of markup – this stupid (and seriously inconsistent) Textile parser is driving me to distraction!!!!!]

“Also not to use ‘fast’ as an adverb except where it means fixed.”
I had to think about that. You mean like “it is stuck fast”? I had to think because that is a rather non-obvious use of the word fast

Not when you consider another word that I believe has the same old English origins: Fasten.

On program vs programme: Worth remembering that it was program for all cases until we let those pesky French influence our language. ;)

Edit: Bah. Nested quotes don’t work – but I don’t post on the forum often enough to see how others have got around it.

Edit: Bah. Nested quotes don’t work – but I don’t post on the forum often enough to see how others have got around it.

Blood sacrifices of small cute furry animals. And maybe the odd child or two. Eye of newt, toe of sloth… you get the idea. ;-)

I tend to just put the outer level of quoting (which is often quoting myself) in italics, followed by a <br /> and then the quote I’m replying to as normal:

Like

This.

There are better/fancier ways, but this method is quick and simple and can be done on a mobile phone without needing a fistful of paracetamol.