jayesjay

Various topics in this thread. (1) Private code areas for specialised institutions. A "subject oriented community" would probably not need to communicate via LS's. An international institution or community would probably use English, as the most general language, and probably use plain text. (2) Looking up a complete sentence in your code book would be fraught. It's bad enough when there are so many synonyms in English for the same thing, it's worse when you have to think "How would someone else ask the same question?" An example of the first problem could be trying to find an item in, say, ebay. I wanted fusible safety discs for a particular pressure cooker. There are quite a few different descriptions of the same item. As for the second problem, let's ask if it is sunny where you are? Does the sun shine, is the sun shining, is it sunny, is the weather sunny, Where you are, is the sun shining, is it ....... In an alphabetical list most of these are separated. In a topical list, it could be easier, but bulky. (3) While nit-picking is in order, I repeat my contention that you are not fundamentally a researcher. You do your research, but most of the work you adduce is development/invention, and that's not meant to be demeaning. Look up the dictionary definition of researcher, and there is nary a word about invention. But researcher sound good, doesn't it.

I have just gone to the turtle site, https://turtlegraphics.fun/turtle.html that you recommended, William, and opened an example. I then saved it and entered it into a PPX9 page via ^G, as a png This worked fine, and although I don't use Affinity, I expect it would work there. So that may answer your need to do Turtle artwork and put it into an Affinity document, surely.

No. Having the idea is a grand start. But it is NOT research. Research is when you look into whether it has been done already, or is a new idea. If the first, then looking into how it has been done so as do it another way or possibly to improve it. If the second, looking into how it could be done. Development is where you take the findings of your research and build on it, develop and write up your method, or as you have done , build a font to fill a demand you have seen. Research is also, in a minor way, asking around, eg in these forums, if anyone has ideas about a topic. I merely would like to emphasise that, so often, you ask a question the answer to which you could find yourself in a few moments on-line searching. Two points here; you say someone else may have a better insight into what to search for. A bit of lateral thinking is needed here. However, your questions may invite discussion, which can be a laudable object. I just wish that you would provide a short explanation of the links you give.

Surely the essence of research is to find what has already been done and, in our world, to further work on the science and mathematics of a topic. In other words, to seek knowledge. Working out how to use that knowledge to implement useful devices or methods is development. I worked for some years at a really significant international industrial research and development laboratory. I did some research myself, and my goodness, it wasn't looking for a concept. It was starting with a concept and looking in depth at what was already done, to get ideas to further the work and do development. I mention my qualifications to try to make the point that I believe my opinions do have some significance, based on my experiences, they do have some validity.

I usually just plug in effectively the words you use for your query. I seldom use esoteric knowledge to interpret your needs. I have never in all the years I have read your postings in the serif forums found evidence of research. What you call research is usually what I would call development, perfectly acceptable in its own right. For example, you didn't find your weird font anywhere, you developed it. Good on you for that. Someone might like it. Not those who want an elegant font. So be it. You may have found in research the germ of an idea somewhere about the concept of your Localisable whatnots. But you expanded it to what could be, possibly, a workable level. That isn't research, it's development. And lastly; I recently posted all the letters I could put after my name at various times in my career. You said that wasn't important. But it was. By showing my membership of the premier electrical engineering institution, I was making the point, that while I was such a member, I was legally an expert; you could respect my opinion.

What you are requesting is that the Affinity range of publishing programs in expanded to include a computer language application. I assume those interested in using computing languages are probably not viewing Affinity forums, which are slightly specialised in their topics. Those people also presumably have derived their Pascal language packages elsewhere. If you want to discuss Pascal programs, the proper place is in a Pascal user forum. As for Affinity writing Pascal programs for sale, just because you want it, doesn't mean that there is a sufficiently large user base out there to justify Serif's potential development costs. I could make a plea for outputs from Basic or Fortran! You wrote: Surely, are you suggesting that currently, Affinity products do not permit images from other products to be passed to Affinity products? I am not an Affinity user, just a very long standing Serif customer, and I assume that Affinity products accept some kinds of standards. Accepting computing language outputs in original from could cost lots. BTW you keep describing yourself as a researcher. I repeat, you may be a developer of a translation system, and a weird font, but much of your research seems to consist of asking questions of the forum members - usually I found I could find the answers in a moments searching on line. I find that irritating.

I agree with Alfred's comments re the requested facility as inappropriate of the product to the Affinity range, and of a limited sales base expectation. I would however thank William for posting the video, which I find fascinating, but I think it would be more appropriately placed in the lounge or science sections of the other related forums as an interesting find.

William, these are the results of a couple of Google searches- "book page design," " where do I start the text x on a page, etc" I did not find anything about text blocks staring on a diagonal. However, see the note below - doing that is more pleasing aesthetically. https://99designs.co.uk/blog/tips/book-layout-design-typesetting-tips/ https://www.tckpublishing.com/6-keys-for-book-page-layout/ https://libguides.lib.msu.edu/c.php?g=97090&p=908734 https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Basic_Book_Design/Headers,_Footers,_and_Page_Numbers https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Basic_Book_Design/Margins Using the recommendation in the last guide above, I tried a sample 6x9 inch page (no text, just lines) with the defined equal all round margins. Then it is clear that the top left point of the text block would lie above the diagonal. However, bringing the text start point to lie on the diagonal increases the top margin, but is more aesthetically pleasant. The bottom right corner also would rise, with a similar result. I haven't read the whole thread; I just looked up the topic as far as I got. If someone else has explained further, great!