Quantum Forest

Dealing with text files requires text editors (doh!) and the choice of editor is one of the typical ‘religious wars’ in computing.

The choice seems to be between ‘do it all environments’ and ‘context specific editors’. The best representative of the first class is Emacs / Xemacs, where one can edit files, read email, browse the web, run statistical software, etc. I found the possibility of editing and building (L^A)T_EX files appealing. Even more appealing is to run S+ or R code directly using ESS. However, I feel overwhelmed by the complexity of installation and configuration of XEmacs, the different key bindings and the unnatural (to me) structure of the menus. Yes, in theory I could configure XEmacs to behave as anything I would prefer; but in practice I would need so much time to learn how to do it, that I would question if it is worth it.

Another candidate in this class is Vim. I have to say that I feel much more comfortable with it: the help system is much better, key bindings are less alien and the whole environment seems to be tailored towards productivity. I found that Vim-LaTeX (an add-on environment) is quite nice and relatively easy to use. Configuring Vim also seems easier than Emacs and I have already played a bit with the _vimrc file. On the other hand, I still do not know if there is anything similar to ESS in the Vim world; I mean syntax highlighting for S+/R and submission of selected commands. I will start learning a bit more about Vim, although I will stick to the following paragraph in the short term.

In the other extreme there are editors that excel at specific tasks. The first one that comes to mind is TEXnicCenter, which is an excellent choice for writing and processing L^AT_EX files (it is an MS Windows only program, but I guess that TeXShop is a similar choice for the Macintosh). When writing R or Splus code I have been quite happy with JGR (Java program, so runs on a Mac as well) and with ConTEXT (MS Windows only) with the optional R-Script highlighter. I think that I will stick to ‘context specific editors’. I also use ConTEXT to write ASReml code, with a highlighter that I wrote a couple of years ago.

In a related matter, when writing In defense of text, I mentioned ConT_EXt, a more modern set of macros for T_EX. Although I can see the superiority of this package, in academic circles the de facto standard is L^AT_EX, so if the writing is aimed to the formal publication process, the latter would be the obvious choice.

I have been cleaning my office as part of my implementation of GTD. I have found some very old files from the time I was at my first year of university. Some files are already unreadable in my computer: they may be Wordstar 3.3 files for which there is no import filter in MS Word. In addition, I found some old plain text files (comma separated values and T_EX documents) which I was able to read with any text editor.

Thus, the question is Why not keep (almost) everything in text files? Unfortunately, at work I do coauthor many documents where:

• I write a small part of a large report.
• I write a big part of a scientific paper with other non-text prone people.
• Everything has to be in MS Word.

However, I do write course notes and long reports where I am the single author. Here I could use the power (and long shelf life) of a markup language. Initially, I thought that the best way to create text-based documents would be L^AT_EX. This macro language for T_EX stores the files as text and when processed produces beautifully typeset documents¹. However, most documents processed by L^AT_EX look the same, and modifying (or creating) styles requires a lot of fiddling around, which implies time that I do not have.

Then enters ConT_EXt, an alternative and more modern macro package still sitting on top of T_EX. Some useful links for Context:

• Context Garden, an ‘open community website for the wonderful T_EX macro package’.
• Converting from L^AT_EX to ConT_EXt.
• etexshow, a browser for ConT_EXt commands under Emacs and XEmacs.

I am still not sure if I will move to ConT_EXt, but I believe that it is worth a try.

¹ By the way, T_EXnicCenter is by far the best L^AT_EX editor under MS Windows.

PS. 2005-04-22. I discuss some text editors in a latter post.

My previous post mentioned that I got David Allen’s ‘Getting things done’ (GTD) book. One of the central tenets of the system is the ability to keep a brain dump in either paper or electronic form, so one stops worrying about pending things. David presents his version of using a Palm for implementing GTD. However, his approach is overly complex for my situation, so I only use two projects lists and three context ‘to do’ lists:

• Projects:Act!, keeps a list of my current active projects.
• Projects:Maybe, keeps a list of projects that I may start one day.
• @Home, list of next actions for when I am at home.
• @Work, list of next actions for when I am at work.
• @Errands, list of next actions for when I am in between.

There is no need for separations like @Computer, @Net and @Calls, because I always have access to computers, net and phone when I am at home or work. If something can be done at any place it will go to my @Home list. The larger the number of lists the bigger the chances that one will miss checking some of them. Although I could use Palm’s Tasks, Calendar and Contacts applications, I find that their integration is very poor. I certainly prefer to use link to Agendus Pro; it is not perfect, but features much better integration between applications and it uses my Palm’s default databases. It also allows attaching icons to ‘to do’ items—feature which I use to classify tasks within lists—and linking people to items. In addition to these simple lists in Agendus, I use Bonsai to outline my most complex projects (this includes less than ten projects at the moment).

PDAs are excellent for reviewing information and reminding me about meetings and tasks (what would life be without the alarms?). Nevertheless, they suck at typing information in, so I often carry a Hipster PDA, which is a fancy name for a bunch of index cards (5×3” or 127×76mm) clipped together with the smallest binder clip one can find. Well, that and a pen or pencil.

The item that I have not yet implemented is a tickler file, because still seems too much work and some of the benefits can be obtained just by including things in a calendar. I may change my mind on this one, depending in how the system works for me. Incidentally, I found a large number of tips on GTD at 43 folders.

PS 2006-03-13: I have updated the workflow in BROKEN LINK.

Some days ago I bought a PalmOne Tungsten T3. I have slowly been exploring (and discovering) software and hardware features.

Yesterday, I went to K-mart and saw a Kodak digital lab. I was starting to pull the SD card off my PDA when I realised that the lab had an infrared port. A few taps and I was in ‘photo’ beaming Orlando’s pictures to the lab. A few seconds later I had photo quality prints of the cute boy. I really love when technology works without any hitches!

I have also been testing and buying some additional things for the PDA: Agendus Pro, a calendar replacement (which I bought, it is very good value); Bonsai, an outliner (which I am testing but I have not bought yet); and Handbase a database that I am starting to evaluate. I have also purchased a Krusell leather cover for the PDA, which has good quality, although it can not be used while synchronising, and Brando’s WorkShop Screen Protector. This screen protectors are great, washable and the delivery took only four days from Hong Kong. Before I purchased Brando’s products I tried with Belkin’s clear screens, but they were too short for the T3 and not worth the money, so I took them back to the shop for a refund.

Yesterday I participated in a three and a half hours meeting that included multiple presentations. I could not stop thinking of The cognitive style of Powerpoint by Edward Tufte (see also Peter Norvig’s Gettysburg Powerpoint Presentation). Why do we feel that we need to partition information into bullet points? Why do we limit ourselves to read aloud the content of a slide?

In addition, all the slides were layed out using a theme with Comic Sans font; the ugliest font of them all. Have not they heard about ban Comic Sans? And why are we tortured with flying bullets? I think that if we need to face bullet points they should all come at the same time. The worst part is when someone click many times to get all the bullet points in place for a single slide and then starts talking. So, why did you use the flying points in the first place?

It is not that I am totally free of this problems, but I have been moving more and more towards the use of diagrams and the ‘good old plain talk’. More substance, less fluff.

Since Orlando’s arrival last week I have had almost no time for updating this weblog or for my usual participation in numerous internet fora. No, I am not complaining but only presenting a statement of fact. It has been good to have a rest from many endless discussions (for example, about the environment in Tasmania) and focus in the new little one. In addition, I have been too sleepy to present any coherent thoughts or drive a good argument.

I have also been working shorter hours, but of a much higher quality. The units of work per time spent have more than doubled. There are so many things that I need to complete that I do not have much time for web browsing, TV or any other “time wasters”. This is great, but I still want to spend more time planning the next year, so I can finish some interesting pending projects.

In another note, I had never been much of a car person; my basic philosophy has always been ‘if it goes forwards and backwards is OK’. Now I love cars, not because of the make, features and speed, but because they are great at soothing babies. If we need to travel, Orlando will cry at most four blocks and then he is sound asleep. What a great treat for struggling first time parents!

While soothing Orlando I have been reading again the notes on project management that I got in a course ran by John Smyrk. They are very (may be too) concise, but present a good structure on things to take into account for the management of projects. For example, the distinctions between outputs and outcomes, the non-existence of so-called “solutions”, ways of determining the stakeholders, etc. Some of the forms used for the ITO (Input Transformation Output) approach are available in this Tasmanian Government web site. I will probably also start re-reading J.R. Turner’s book The handbook of project-based management, which seems to go pretty much with the ITO model.