perro
/
perrotuerto.blog
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Adición de correcciones de De

This commit is contained in:
perro tuerto 2020-02-12 00:32:10 -06:00
parent ea855d6895
commit cb3a629e23
1 changed files with 258 additions and 256 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

514
content/md/005_hiim-master.md
View File

@ -3,35 +3,35 @@
> @published 2020/02/10, 12:00 {.published}
Uff, after six months of writing, reviewing, deleting, yelling
and finally giving up, I finished my Master research thesis.
You can check it out [here](http://maestria.perrotuerto.blog).
and almost giving up, I finally finished the Master's research
thesis. You can check it out [here](http://maestria.perrotuerto.blog).
The thesis is about intellectual property, commons and cultural
and philosophical production. It was for the Philosophy Master
Degree at National Autonomous University of Mexico. This research
was written in Spanish and it consists of almost 27K words and
~100 pages.
and philosophical production. I completed the Master's of Philosophy
at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (+++UNAM+++).
This research was written in Spanish and it consists of almost
27K words and ~100 pages.
Since the beginning I decided not to write it with a text processor
Since the beginning, I decided not to write it with a text processor
such as LibreOffice nor Microsoft Office. I made that decision
because:
* Office software was designed for that particular kind of work,
* Office software was designed for a particular kind of work,
not for research purposes.
* Bibliography managing or writing review could be very very
* Bibliography managing or reviewing the writing could be very very
messy.
* I need several outputs which would require heavy clean up if
I write the research on +++ODT+++ or +++DOCX+++ formats.
* I wanted to see how far I could go by using just [Markdown](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markdown),
* I needed several outputs which would require heavy clean up if
I wrote the research in +++ODT+++ or +++DOCX+++ formats.
* I wanted to see how far I could go by just using [Markdown](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markdown),
a terminal and [+++FOSS+++](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software).
In general the thesis is actually an automated repository where
you can see everything---including the whole bibliography, the
you can see everything---including the entire bibliography, the
site and the writing history. The methodology is based on automated
and multiformat standardized publishing, or as I like to call
it: branched publishing.
Here isn't the space to discuss the method, but these are some
This isn't the space to discuss the method, but these are some
general ideas:
* We have some inputs which are our working files.
@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ general ideas:
instead of losing our time in formatting or having nightmares
with layout design.
In order to achieve that it's necessary to avoid any kind of
In order to be successful, it's necessary to avoid any kind of
[+++WYSIWYG+++](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WYSIWYG) and [Desktop
Publishing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_publishing)
approaches. Instead, branched publishing employs [+++WYSIGYM+++](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WYSIWYM)
@ -65,21 +65,21 @@ Why Markdown? Because it is:
* a plain and open format
Markdown format was intended for blog writing. So “vanilla” Markdown
isn't enough for research or scholar writing. And I'm not fan
of [Pandoc's Markdown](https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#pandocs-markdown).
isn't enough for research or scholarly writing. And I'm not a
fan of [Pandoc's Markdown](https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#pandocs-markdown).
Don't get me wrong, [Pandoc](https://pandoc.org) _is_ the Swiss
knife for document conversion, its name suits perfectly. But
for the kind of publishing I do, Pandoc is part of the automation
process, not for inputs nor outputs. When I use Pandoc as a middleman
for some formats, it helps me to save a lot of time.
knife for document conversion, its name suits it perfectly. But
for the type of publishing I do, Pandoc is part of the automation
process and not for inputs or outputs. I use Pandoc as a middleman
for some formats as it helps me save a lot of time.
For inputs and output formats I think Pandoc is a great general
purpose tool, but not enough for a fussy publisher like this
dog. Plus, I love scripting so I prefer to employ my time on
that instead of configuring Pandoc's outputs---it makes me learn
more. So in this publishing process Pandoc is used when I haven't
resolve something or I'm very lazy to do it, +++LOL+++.
perro. Plus, I love scripting so I prefer to employ my time on
that instead of configuring Pandoc's outputs---it helps me learn
more. So in this publishing process, Pandoc is used when I haven't
resolved something or I'm too lazy to do it, +++LOL+++.
Unlike text processing formats as +++ODT+++ or +++DOCX+++, +++MD+++
is very easy to customize. You don't need to install plugins,
@ -93,13 +93,13 @@ for citing the bibliography by its id.
### BibLaTeX
Formatting bibliography is one of the main headaches for many
researchers. People require a lot of time to learn how to quote
and cite. And no matter how much experience they have, usually
the references or the bibliography has typos.
Formatting a bibliography is one of the main headaches for many
researchers. It requires a lot of time and energy to learn how
to quote and cite. And no matter how much experience one may
have, the references or the bibliography usually have typos.
I known it by experience. Most of our clients have a huge mess
on their bibliography. But 99.99% percent of the times it's because
I know it by experience. Most of our clients' bibliographies
are a huge mess. But 99.99% percent of the time it's because
they do it manually… So I decided to avoid that hell.
They are several alternatives for bibliography formatting and
@ -120,11 +120,11 @@ an object notation. Here is a sample of an entry:
```
At the beginning of the entry you indicate its type and id. Each
entry has an array of key-value pairs. Depending the type of
reference, there are some mandatory keys. If you need more, you
can just put them in. This could be very hard to edit directly
because +++PDF+++ compilation doesn't tolerate syntax errors.
For comfort, you can use some +++GUI+++ like [JabRef](https://www.jabref.org).
entry has an array of key-value pairs. Depending on the type
of reference, there are some mandatory keys. If you need more,
you can just add them in. This could be very difficult to edit
directly because +++PDF+++ compilation doesn't tolerate syntax
errors. For comfort, you can use some +++GUI+++ like [JabRef](https://www.jabref.org).
With this software you can easily generate, edit or delete bibliographic
entries as if they were rows in a spreadsheet.
@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ just something like this:
> @textcite[someone2020a] states… Now I am paraphrasing someone
> so I would cite her at the end @parencite[someone2020a].
When bibliography is processed I get something like this:
When the bibliography is processed I get something like this:
> Someone (2020) states… Now I am paraphrasing someone so
> I would cite her at the end (Someone, 2020).
@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ any additional syntax for Pecas Markdown. For processing purposes
I could use any other kind of syntax. But for writing and editing
tasks I found the at sign to be very accessible and easy to find.
The example was very simple and it couldn't made clear the point
The example was very simple and doesn't fully explore the point
of doing this. By using ids:
* I don't have to worry if the bibliographic entries change.
@ -158,39 +158,40 @@ of doing this. By using ids:
automatically!
* I _always_ get the correct structure.
In a further section I explain how it is possible. The main idea
is that with some scripts these two inputs became one, a Markdown
file with added bibliography, ready for automation processes.
In a further section I explain how this process is possible.
The main idea is that with some scripts these two inputs became
one, a Markdown file with an added bibliography, ready for automation
processes.
## Outputs
I hate +++PDF+++ as the only research output, because most of
the times I made a general reading on screen and, if I want some
detailed reading, with notes and shit, I prefer to print it.
It isn't comfortable to read a +++PDF+++ on screen and most of
the times printed +++HTML+++ or ebooks are aesthetically unpleasant.
the time I made a general reading on screen and, if I wanted
a more detailed reading, with notes and shit, I prefer to print
it. It isn't comfortable to read a +++PDF+++ on screen and most
of the time printed +++HTML+++ or ebooks are aesthetically unpleasant.
That's why I decided to deliver different formats, so readers
can pick what likes the most.
can pick what they like best.
Seeing how publishing is becoming more and more centralized,
unfortunately the deployment of +++MOBI+++ formats for Kindle
readers is recommendable---by the way, +++FUCK+++ Amazon, they
steal to writers and publishers, use Amazon only if the text
steal from writers and publishers. Use Amazon only if the text
isn't in another source. I don't like proprietary software as
Kindlegen, but it is the only _legal_ way to deploy +++MOBI+++
files. I hope that little by little Kindle readers at least start
to hack their devices. Right now Amazon is the shit, but remember:
if you don't have it, you don't own it. See what happened with
[books in Microsoft Store](https://www.npr.org/2019/07/07/739316746/microsoft-closes-the-book-on-its-e-library-erasing-all-user-content)…
to hack their devices. Right now Amazon is the shit people use,
but remember: if you don't have it, you don't own it. Look what
happened with [books in Microsoft Store](https://www.npr.org/2019/07/07/739316746/microsoft-closes-the-book-on-its-e-library-erasing-all-user-content)…
And the cherry of the cake was a petition from my tutor. He wanted
an editable file he could use easily. A long time ago Microsoft
monopolized ewriting, so the easiest solution is to provide a
+++DOCX+++ file. I would rather use +++ODT+++ format but I have
seen how some people doesn't know how to open it. My tutor isn't
part of that group, but for the outputs it's good to think not
only in what we need but in what we could need. People barely
read research, if it isn't accessible in what they know, they
What took the cake was a petition from my tutor. He wanted an
editable file he could use easily. Long ago Microsoft monopolized
ewriting, so the easiest solution is to provide a +++DOCX+++
file. I would prefer to use +++ODT+++ format but I have seen
how some people don't know how to open it. My tutor isn't part
of that group, but for the outputs it's good to think not only
in what we need but in what we could need. People barely read
research, if it isn't accessible in what they already know, they
won't read.
So, the following outputs are:
@ -215,51 +216,50 @@ metadata handling. Each Pecas project can be heavily customized
since it allows Ruby, Python or shell scripts. The main objective
behind this is the ability to remake ebooks from recipes. Therefore,
the outputs are disposable in order to save space and because
you don't need them all the time and you shouldn't edit final
formats!
you don't need them all the time and shouldn't edit final formats!
Pecas is rolling release software with General Public License,
so it's open, free and _libre_ program. For a couple months Pecas
has been unmaintained because this year we are gonna start all
over again, with cleaner code, easier installation and a bunch
of new features---I hope, we need [your support](https://perrotuerto.blog/content/html/en/_donate.html).
Pecas is rolling release software with +++GNU+++ General Public
License, so it's open, free and _libre_ program. For a couple
months Pecas has been unmaintained because this year we are going
to start all over again, with cleaner code, easier installation
and a bunch of new features---I hope, we need [your support](https://perrotuerto.blog/content/html/en/_donate.html).
### PDF
For +++PDF+++ output I rely on LaTeX and LuaLaTeX. Why? Just
because it is what I'm used to. I don't have any particular argument
against other frameworks or engines inside TeX family. It's a
world I still have to dig more.
against other frameworks or engines inside the TeX family. It's
a world I still have to dig more into.
Why don't I use desktop publishing instead, like InDesign or
Scribus? Outside its own workflow, desktop publishing is hard
Scribus? Outside of its own workflow, desktop publishing is hard
to automate and maintain. This approach is great if you just
want a +++PDF+++ output or if you desire to work with a +++GUI+++.
For file longevity and automated and multiformat standardized
publishing simply it isn't the best option.
publishing, desktop publishing simply isn't the best option.
Why don't I just export a +++PDF+++ from the +++DOCX+++ file?
I work on publishing, I still have some respect to my eyes…
I work in publishing, I still have some respect for my eyes…
Anyways, for this output I use Pandoc as a middleman. I could
manage the conversion from +++MD+++ to +++TEX+++ format with
scripts, but I was lazy. So, Pandoc converts +++MD+++ to +++TEX+++
and LuaLaTeX compiles it into a +++PDF+++. I don't call both
programs explicitly, instead I wrote an script to automate this
job. In a further section I explain this.
Anyway, for this output I use Pandoc as a middleman. I could
have managed the conversion from +++MD+++ to +++TEX+++ format
with scripts, but I was lazy. So, Pandoc converts +++MD+++ to
+++TEX+++ and LuaLaTeX compiles it into a +++PDF+++. I don't
use both programs explicitly, instead I wrote a script in order
to automate this process. In a further section I explain this.
![The research in its +++PDF+++ output; I don't like justified text, it's bad for your eyes.](../../../img/p005_i003.png)
### DOCX
This output doesn't have anything special. I didn't customize
its styles. I just call Pandoc via another script. Remember,
this file is for editing so its layout doesn't really matters.
its styles. I just use Pandoc via another script. Remember, this
file is for editing so its layout doesn't really matter.
## Writing
Besides the publishing method used in this research, I want to
comment some particularities about the influence of the technical
comment on some particularities about the influence of the technical
setup over the writing.
### Text Editor
@ -269,112 +269,115 @@ exception. Instead, I prefer to use text editors. Between them
I have a particular taste for the most minimalist ones like [Vim](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vim_(text_editor))
or [Gedit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gedit).
Vim is a terminal text editor. I use it as regular basis---sorry
Vim is a terminal text editor. I use it on a regular basis---sorry
[Emacs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs) folks. I write almost
anything, including this thesis, with Vim because of its minimalist
everything, including this thesis, with Vim because of its minimalist
interface. No fucking buttons, no distractions, just me and the
black-screen terminal.
Gedit is a +++GUI+++ text editor and I use it mainly for [RegEx](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_expression)
or searches. In this project I utilized it for quick looks to
the bibliography. I like JabRef as a bibliography manager, but
for getting the ids I just need access to the raw +++BIB+++ file.
Gedit was a good companion for that particular job, because its
lack of “buttonware”---this annoying tendency to put buttons
or searches. In this project I utilized it for quick references
to the bibliography. I like JabRef as a bibliography manager,
but for getting the ids I just need access to the raw +++BIB+++
file. Gedit was a good companion for that particular job because
its lack of “buttonware”---the annoying tendency to put buttons
everywhere.
### Citations
I want the research to be as accessible as possible. I didn't
want to use a complicated citation style. That's why I only used
parenthetical and textual cites.
parenthetical and textual citations.
This could be an issue for most scholars. But when I see typos
in their complex citations and quotations I can't have any empathy.
This could be an issue for many scholars. But when I see typos
in their complex citations and quotations, I don't have any empathy.
If you are gonna add complexity to your work, the least you can
do is to do it right. And, let's be honest, most scholars add
complexity because they wanna look fancy---i.e. they conform
with formation rules for research texts in order to be part of
a community or gain some objectivity.
do is to do it right. And let's be honest, most scholars add
complexity because they want to make themselves look good---i.e.
they conform with formation rules for research texts in order
to be part of a community or gain some objectivity.
### Block Quotations
You are not gonna see any block quotes in the research. This
wasn't only because accessibility---some people can't distinguish
this type of quotes---but for the way the bibliography was handled.
You are not going to see any block quotes in the research. This
isn't only because of accessibility---some people can't distinguish
these types of quotes---but the ways in which the bibliography
was handled.
One of the main purposes for block quotations is to provide a
first and extended hand to someone else saying. But sometimes
it's use as text filling. In a common way to do research in Philosophy,
the output tends to be a “final” paper. That text is the research
plus the bibliography. This format doesn't allow to embed any
other files, like papers, websites, books or data bases. If you
want to provide some literal information, quotes and block quotes
are the way to do it.
first and extended hand of what point a writer is making. But
sometimes it's also used as text filling. In a common way to
do research in Philosophy, the output tends to be a “final” paper.
That text is the research plus the bibliography. This format
doesn't allow to embed any other files, like papers, websites,
books or data bases. If you want to provide some literal information,
quotes and block quotes are the way to go.
Because this thesis is actually an automated repository, it contains
all references used for the research. It has bibliography, but
also each quoted work for backup and educational purposes. Why
would I use block quotes if you can easily check the files? Even
better, you could use some search function or read the whole
data for validation purposes.
all the references used for the research. It has a bibliography,
but also each quoted work for backup and educational purposes.
Why would I use block quotes if you could easily check the files?
Even better, you could use some search function or go over all
the data for validation purposes.
Moreover, the university doesn't allow submissions of long texts.
I'm agree with that, I think we have other technical capabilities
that allow us to be more synthetic. By putting aside block quotes,
Moreover, the university doesn't allow long submission. I agree
with that, I think we have other technical capabilities that
allow us to be more synthetic. By putting aside block quotes,
I had more space for the actual research.
Take it or leave it, research as repository and not as a file
give us more possibilities for accessibility, portability and
gives us more possibilities for accessibility, portability and
openness.
### Footnotes
Oh, the footnotes! So beautiful technic for displaying side text.
It works great, it allows metawriting and so on. But it works
as expected if the output you are thinking of is, firstly, a
file and, secondly, a text with fixed layout. In other kind of
outputs, footnotes can be a nightmare.
Oh, the footnotes! Such a beautiful technique for displaying
side text. It works great, it permits metawriting and so on.
But it works as expected if the output you are thinking of is,
firstly, a file and secondly, a text with fixed layout. In other
types of outputs, footnotes can be a nightmare.
I have the conviction that most of the footnotes can be inside
text. This is because three personal experiences. During my undergraduate
and graduate studies, as a Philosophy student we have to read
a lot of fucking critical editions, which tend to have their
“critical” notes as footnotes. For this types of text I get it,
people doesn't like to mix their words with someone else, less
if it's between a philosophical authority and a contemporary
philosopher---notice that it's a taste not a mandate. But this
is a shitty Master research thesis, not a critical edition.
I have the conviction that most footnotes can be incorporated
into the text. This is due to three personal experiences. During
my undergraduate and graduate studies, as a Philosophy student
we had to read a lot of fucking critical editions, which tend
to have their “critical” notes as footnotes. For these types
of text I get it, people don't want to confuse their words for
someone else's, less if it's between a philosophical authority
and a contemporary philosopher---take note that it's a personal
taste and not a mandate. But this is a shitty Master's research
thesis, not a critical edition.
I used to hate footnotes, now I just dislike them. Part of my
job is to review, extract and fix other peoples footnotes. I
job is to review, extract and fix other peoples' footnotes. I
can bet you that half of the time footnotes aren't properly displayed
or they are missing. Commonly this is not a software error. Sometimes
is because people do them manually. But I won't blame publishers
nor designers for their mistakes. For how things are developing
on publishing, most of the time the issue is the lack of time.
We are being pushed to publish books as quick as we can and one
of the side effects is the loss of quality. Bibliography, footnotes
and block quotes are the easiest way to find out how much care
does a text has.
it's because people do them manually. But I won't blame publishers
nor designers for their mistakes. The way things are developing
in publishing, most of the time the issue is the lack of time.
We are being pushed to publish books as fast as we can and one
of the side effects of that is the loss of quality. Bibliography,
footnotes and block quotes are the easiest way to find out how
much care has gone into a text.
I do blame some authors for this mess. I repeat, it is just a
personal experience, but in my work I have seen that most authors
put footnotes in the following situations:
* They want to add shit but not to rewrite shit.
* They aren't good at writing or they are in a hurry, so footnotes
* They aren't very good writers or they are in a hurry, so footnotes
are the way to go.
* They think that by adding footnotes, block quotes or references
they would “earn” objectivity.
they can “earn” objectivity.
I think my thesis needs more rewriting, I could have said things
in a more comprehensive way, but I was done---_writing_ philosophy
is not my thing, I prefer to talk or programming (!) it. That
means I took my time on the review process---ask my tutor about
that, +++LMFAO+++. It would have been easier for me to just add
footnotes, but it would have been harder to you to read that
shit. Besides that, footnotes takes more space than rewriting.
I think the thesis needs more rewriting, I could have written
things in a more comprehensive way, but I was done---_writing_
philosophy is not my thing, I prefer to speak or program (!)
it. That is why I took my time on the review process---ask my
tutor about that, +++LMFAO+++. It would have been easier for
me to just add in footnotes, but it would have been harder to
read that shit. Besides that, footnotes take more space than
rewriting.
So, with respect to the reader and in agreement with the text
extension of my university, I decided not to use footnotes.
@ -383,35 +386,35 @@ extension of my university, I decided not to use footnotes.
As you can see, I had to write some scripts and use third party
software in order to have a thesis as an automated repository.
It sounds difficult or as nonsense, but, doesn't Philosophy has
that kind of reputation too? >:)
It sounds difficult or perhaps like nonsense, but, doesn't Philosophy
have that kind of reputation, anyway? >:)
### MD Tools
The first challenges I had were:
* I needed to know exactly how many pages I have wrote.
* I needed to know exactly how many pages I had written.
* I wanted an easier way to beautify +++MD+++ format.
* I had to do some quality checks in my writing.
* I had to make some quality checks in my writing.
Thus, I decided to develop some programs for these jobs: [`texte`](https://gitlab.com/snippets/1917485),
Thus, I decided to develop some programs for these tasks: [`texte`](https://gitlab.com/snippets/1917485),
[`texti`](https://gitlab.com/snippets/1917487) and [`textu`](https://gitlab.com/snippets/1917488),
respectively.
This programs are actually Ruby scripts that I put on my `/usr/local/bin`
These programs are actually Ruby scripts that I put on my `/usr/local/bin`
directory. You can do the same, but I wouldn't recommended it.
Right now in Programando +++LIBRE+++ros we are refactoring all
that shit so they can be shipped as a Ruby gem. So I recommend
you to wait.
waiting.
With `texte` I can know the number of lines, characters, characters
with spaces, words and three differents sizes of pages: by every
1,800 characters with spaces, by every 250 words and an average
of both---you can set another lengths for page sizes.
With `texte` I am able to know the number of lines, characters,
characters with spaces, words and three different page sizes:
by every 1,800 characters with spaces, by every 250 words and
an average of both---you can set other lengths for page sizes.
The +++MD+++ beautifier is `texti`. By the moment it only works
well on paragraphs. It was enough for me, my issue was with the
disparate length of lines---yeah, I don't use line wrap.
The +++MD+++ beautifier is `texti. For the moment it only works
well with paragraphs. It was good enough for me, my issue was
with the disparate length of lines---yeah, I don't use line wrap.
![`texti` sample help display.](../../../img/p005_i004.png)
@ -420,17 +423,17 @@ marks or brackets: sometimes we forget to close them. So `textu`
is for this quality check.
These three programs were very helpful for my writing, that is
why we decided to continue its development as a Ruby gem. For
our work and personal projects, +++MD+++ is our main format,
so we have the obligation to provide tools in order to help writers
and publishers that are also using Markdown.
why we decided to continue in its development as a Ruby gem.
For our work and personal projects, +++MD+++ is our main format,
so we are obligated to provide tools that help writers and publishers
also using Markdown.
### Baby Biber
If you are into TeX family, you probably know [Biber](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biber_(LaTeX)),
the bibliography processing program. With Biber we can compile
bibliographic entries of BibLaTeX in +++PDF+++ outputs and do
checks or clean ups.
the bibliography processing program. With Biber we are able to
compile bibliographic entries of BibLaTeX in +++PDF+++ outputs
and carry out checks or clean ups.
I started to have issues with the references because our publishing
method implies the deployment of outputs in separate processes
@ -439,29 +442,29 @@ With Biber I was able to add the bibliographic entries but only
for +++PDF+++.
The solution I came to was the addition of references in +++MD+++
before any other process. By doing this I merged the inputs in
one +++MD+++ file. This new file is used for the deployment of
all the outputs.
before any other process. In doing this, I merged the inputs
in one +++MD+++ file. This new file is used for the deployment
of all the outputs.
This solution implies the use of Biber as a clean up tool and
the development of a program that process bibliographic entries
the development of a program that processes bibliographic entries
of BibLaTeX inside Markdown files. [Baby Biber](https://gitlab.com/snippets/1917492)
is this program. I wanted to honor Biber and made clear that
this program is on its baby steps.
is this program. I wanted to honor Biber and make clear that
this program is still in its baby stages.
What does Baby Biber do?
* It creates a new +++MD+++ file with references and bibliography.
* It adds references if the original +++MD+++ file calls to @textcite or
@parencite with a correct BibLaTeX id.
* It adds bibliography at the end of the documents according to the
* It adds the bibliography to the end of the documents according to the
called references.
One headache with references and bibliography styles is how to
customize them. With Pandoc you can use [`pandoc-citeproc`](https://github.com/jgm/pandoc-citeproc)
which allow you to select any style written in Citation Style
Language (+++CSL+++). This styles are in +++XML+++ and it is
a serious thing: you should apply this standards. You can check
which allows you to select any style written in Citation Style
Language (+++CSL+++). These styles are in +++XML+++ and it is
a serious thing: you should apply these standards. You can check
different +++CSL+++ citation styles in its [official repo](https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles).
Baby Biber still doesn't support +++CSL+++! Instead, it uses
@ -471,9 +474,9 @@ because of two issues:
1. I didn't take the time to read how to implement +++CSL+++ citation styles.
2. My University allows me to use any kind of citation style as long as
it has uniformity and display the information in a clear manner.
it has uniformity and displays the information in a clear manner.
So, yeah, I have a huge debt here. And maybe it would stay like
So, yeah, I have a huge debt here. And maybe it will stay like
that. The new version of Pecas will implement and improve the
work done by Baby Biber---I hope.
@ -487,28 +490,27 @@ with LuaLaTeX and Biber (optionally).
I don't like the default layouts of Pandoc and I could have read
the docs in order to change that behavior, but I decided to experiment
a bit. The new version of Pecas will implement +++PDF+++ outputs,
so I wanted to play a little more in the formatting, as I did
with Baby Biber. Besides, I needed a quick program for +++PDF++
outputs, because sometimes we publish [fanzines](http://zines.perrotuerto.blog/).
so I wanted to play around a little with the formatting, as I
did with Baby Biber. Besides, I needed a quick program for +++PDF++
outputs because we publish sometimes [fanzines](http://zines.perrotuerto.blog/).
So, [`export-pdf`](https://gitlab.com/snippets/1917490) is this
So, [`export-pdf`](https://gitlab.com/snippets/1917490) is the
experiment. It uses Pandoc to convert +++MD+++ to +++TEX+++ files.
Then it does some clean up and injects the template. Finally
Then it does some clean up and injects the template. Finally,
it compiles the +++PDF+++ with LuaLaTeX and Biber---if you want
to add the bibliographic entries by this mean. It also exports
a +++PDF+++ booklet with `pdfbook2`, but I don't deploy it in
this repo because the +++PDF+++ is letter size, to big for a
booklet.
to add the bibliographic entries this way. It also exports a
+++PDF+++ booklet with `pdfbook2`, but I don't deploy it in this
repo because the +++PDF+++ is letter size, too large for a booklet.
I have a huge debt here that I won't pay. It is cool to have
a program for +++PDF+++ outputs that I understand, but I still
want to experiment with [ConTeXt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ConTeXt).
I think ConTeXt could be a lot of help because I can use +++XML+++
I think ConTeXt could be a useful tool while using +++XML+++
files for +++PDF+++ outputs. I defend Markdown as input format
for writers and publishers, but for automation +++XML+++ format
is way better. For the new version of Pecas I have been thinking
in the possibility to use +++XML+++ for any kind of standard
about the possibility of using +++XML+++ for any kind of standard
output like +++EPUB+++, +++PDF+++ or +++JATS+++. I have problems
with +++TEX+++ format because it creates an additional format
just for one output, why would I allow it if +++XML+++ can provide
@ -521,12 +523,12 @@ me with at least three outputs?
I already mentioned the third party software I used for this
repo:
* Vim as main text editor.
* Gedit as side text editor.
* JabRef as bibliography manager.
* Pandoc as document converter.
* LuaLaTeX as +++PDF+++ engine.
* Biber as bibliography cleaner.
* Vim as a main text editor.
* Gedit as a side text editor.
* JabRef as a bibliography manager.
* Pandoc as a document converter.
* LuaLaTeX as a +++PDF+++ engine.
* Biber as a bibliography cleaner.
The tools I developed and this software are all +++FOSS+++, so
you can use them if you want without paying or asking for permission---and
@ -538,12 +540,12 @@ There is a fundamental design issue in this research as automated
repository: I should have put all the scripts in one place. At
the beginning of the research I thought it would be easier to
place each script side by side its inputs. Over time I realized
it wasn't a good idea.
that it wasn't a good idea.
The good thing is that there is one script that works as a [wrapper](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrapper_function).
You don't really have to now anything of that. You just write
You don't really have to know anything about it. You just write
the research in Markdown, fill the BibLaTeX bibliography and
every time you want or your server is configured, call that script.
any time you want or your server is configured, call that script.
This is a simplified listing showing the places of each script,
inputs and outputs inside the repo:
@ -580,18 +582,18 @@ inputs and outputs inside the repo:
### Bibliography pathway
Even in a simplified view you can see how this repo is a fucking
Even with a simplified view you can see how this repo is a fucking
mess. The bibliography [01] and the thesis [08] are the main
directories in this repo. As a sibling you have the website [07].
The bibliography directory isn't part of the automation process.
I worked the +++BIB+++ file [02] in different moments than my
writing. I exported it to +++HTML+++ [03] every time I used JabRef.
This +++HTML+++ is for queries from the browser. Over there it's
also a simple script [04] to clean the bibliography with Biber
and the configuration file [05] for Baby Biber. Are you a data
hoarder? There is an special directory [06] for you with all
the works used for this research ;)
I worked on the +++BIB+++ file [02] in different moments than
my writing. I exported it to +++HTML+++ [03] every time I used
JabRef. This +++HTML+++ is for queries from the browser. Over
there it's also a simple script [04] to clean the bibliography
with Biber and the configuration file [05] for Baby Biber. Are
you a data hoarder? There is an special directory [06] for you
with all the works used for this research ;)
### Engine on
@ -608,7 +610,7 @@ The wrapper does the following steps:
to their metadata [16] and Pecas config file [15].
4. It exports [10] the +++MD+++ to +++DOCX+++ [11].
And that's it. The process to developing a thesis as a automate
And that's it. The process of developing a thesis as a automate
repository allows me to just worry about three things:
1. Write the research.
@ -617,89 +619,89 @@ repository allows me to just worry about three things:
### The legal stuff
That's how it works, but we still have to talk about how can
the thesis _legally_ be used…
That's how it works, but we still have to talk about how the
thesis can _legally_ be used…
This research was pay by all Mexicans through its taxes. The
National Council of Science and Technology (Conacyt, by its acronym
in Spanish) gave me an scholarship to study the Master in Philosophy
at the UNAM---yeah, American and British folks, must of the times
we got pay here for our graduate studies.
This research was paid for by every Mexican through taxation.
The National Council of Science and Technology (abbreviated Conacyt)
granted me a scholarship to study a Master's in Philosophy at
+++UNAM+++---yeah, American and British folks, more likely than
not, we get paid here for our graduate studies.
This scholarship is a problematic privilege. So the least I can
do in return is to liberate everything that was pay by my homies
and give free workshops and advices. I repeat: it is _the least_
we can do. I'm in disagree of using this privilege for having
a nice or party living and then drop-off. In this country and
all the crisis we are having, this scholarship is to improve
your community and not only you.
do in return is to liberate everything that was paid for by my
homies and give free workshops and advice. I repeat: it is _the
least_ we can do. I disagree with using this privilege to live
a lavish or party lifestyle only to then drop-out. In a country
with many crises, scholarships are granted to improve your communities,
not only you.
In general, I have the conviction that if you are a researcher
or a graduate student and you already get pay---it doesn't matter
it's a salary or an scholarship, it doesn't matter you are in
a public or private university, it doesn't matter you get the
money from public or private administrations---you have a commitment
with your community, with our species and with our planet. If
you wanna talk about free labor and exploitation---which it does
happen---please look at the bottom. In this shitty world you
are on the upper levels of this [nonsense pyramid](https://es.crimethinc.com/posters/capitalism-is-a-pyramid-scheme).
or a graduate student and you already get paid---it doesn't matter
if it's a salary or a scholarship, it doesn't matter if you are
in a public or private university, it doesn't matter if you get
the money from public or private administrations---you have a
commitment with your community, with our species and with our
planet. If you wanna talk about free labor and exploitation---which
does happen---please look at the bottom. In this shitty world
you are on the upper levels of this [nonsense pyramid](https://es.crimethinc.com/posters/capitalism-is-a-pyramid-scheme).
As a researcher, scientist, philosopher, theorist, artist and
so on, you should help other people. You can still feed your
ego and believe you are the shit or the next +++AAA+++ thinker,
philosopher or artist. Both things doesn't overlap---but it's
still annoying.
so on, you have an obligation to help other people. You can still
feed your ego and believe you are the shit or the next +++AAA+++
thinker, philosopher or artist. These two things doesn't overlap---but
it's still annoying.
That is why this research has a [copyfarleft](https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Copyfarleft)
license for its content and a copyleft license for its code.
Actually, it's the same licensing scheme of [this blog](https://perrotuerto.blog/content/html/en/_fork.html).
With the Open and Free Publishing License (+++LEAL+++, by its
acronym in Spanish that also means “loyal”) you are free to use,
copy, reedit, modify, share or sell any of this content under
the following conditions:
With Open and Free Publishing License (abbreviated +++LEAL+++,
that also means “loyal”) you are free to use, copy, reedit, modify,
share or sell any of this content under the following conditions:
* Anything produced with this content must be under some type of +++LEAL+++.
* All files---editable or final formats---must be public access.
* All files---editable or final formats---must be publicly accessible.
* The content usage cannot imply defamation, exploitation or surveillance.
Copyfarleft is the way---but not the solution---that fits our
Copyfarleft is the way---but not the solution---that suits our
context and our possibilities of freedom. Don't come here with
your liberal and individualistic notion of freedom---like the
dudes from Weblate that kicked this blog out because its content
license “is not free,” even though they say the code, but not
the content, should use a “free” license, like the fucking +++GPL+++
this blog has for its code. This type of liberal freedom doesn't
work in a place were no State or corporation can warrant us a
minimum set of individuals freedoms, as happens on Asia, Africa
and the other America---Latin America and the America that it
isn't portrayed in the “American Dream” adds.
work in a place where no State or corporation can warrant us
a minimum set of individual freedoms, as it happens in Asia,
Africa and the other America---Latin America and the America
that isn't portrayed in the “American Dream” adds.
## Last thoughts
As thesis works over an hypothesis, the technical and legal pathway
of this research worked with the possibility of having a thesis
as an automated repository, instead of a thesis as a file. At
the end, the possibility became a fact, but in a limited way.
As a thesis works with a hypothesis, the technical and legal
pathway of this research works with the possibility of having
a thesis as an automated repository, instead of a thesis as a
file. In the end, the possibility became a fact, but in a limited
way.
I think that the idea of a thesis as a automated repo is doable
and it could be a better way for research deployment rather than
uploading a single file. But this implementation has a lot of
leaks that made it not suitable for escalation.
and could be a better way for research deployment rather than
uploading a single file. But this implementation contained many
leaks that made it unsuitable for escalation.
Further work it is necessary to be able to ship this as an standard
Further work is necessary to be able to ship this as a standard
practice. This technique could also be applied for automation
and uniformity among publications, like papers in a journal or
a book collection. The required labor it isn't to much, and _maybe_
it is something I would work for the PhD. But right now is all
I can offer!
a book collection. The required labor isn't too much, and _maybe_
it's something I would engage with during a PhD. But for right
now, this is all that I can offer!
Thanks to @hacklib for pushing me to write this post and, again,
thanks to my +++S.O.+++ for persuade me to study the Master degree
and for reviewing this post. Thanks to my tutor, Programando
thanks to my +++S.O.+++ for persuading me to study a Master's
degree and for reviewing this post. Thanks to my tutor, Programando
+++LIBRE+++ros and Gaby for their academic support. I can't forget
to say thanks to [Colima Hacklab](https://hacklab.cc), [Rancho
to give thanks to [Colima Hacklab](https://hacklab.cc), [Rancho
Electrónico](https://ranchoelectronico.org) and [Miau Telegram
Group](https://t.me/miau2018) for their technical support. And
also thanks to all the people and organizations I mention in
the acknowledment section of the research!
also thanks to all the people and organizations I mentioned in
the acknowledgment section of the research!