Talk:Typesetting

message: A reference or citation is needed for this statement added by user:Dsagman –
:"...By the year 2000, this industry segment had shrunk to serving primarily educational, reference, and professional publisers. In addition, the majority of this work, especially keying and data conversion, has moved off-shore to countries such as India and the Philippines."
I snipped it out of the article for the meantime, until it can be verified.
The original paragraph for context:
:"Before the 1980s practically all typesetting for publishers and advertisers was performed by specialist typesetting companies. These companies, many of which in the US were located in rural Pennsylvania, New England or the Midwest where labor was cheap but within a few hours distance of the major publishing centers, performed keyboarding, editing and production of paper or film output, and formed a large component of the graphic arts industry. By the year 2000, this industry segment had shrunk to serving primarily educational, reference, and professional publisers. In addition, the majority of this work, especially keying and data conversion, has moved off-shore to countries such as India and the Philippines."
Arbo | talk 14:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation for info on the fate of minicomputer-based systems

message: :note: deal with offset litho, production of a flong, etc. etc. here
I removed it because it should belong on talk, not the main page. Perhaps the author of the note would like to complete the task. Until then, let's not clutter the entry itself. MShonle 22:06, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: From the main page was this note:

message: 211.30.107.214 replaced "has" in the passage about TeX to "is considered to have". Okay, I can appreciate why, but "considered" is weasley and needs to be qualified. Who considers TeX to have set high standards? And what's the source? This criticism should be applied to the original, ie: what was the source for "...has set high standards..." Who, or what group of people say it has? —Arbo 19:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Whilst i don't really care which phrase is used, as it is pretty immaterial in the end (angels on heads of pins etc) it is possible that the experts might disagree. Some might say it has. Others might say it hasn't. Period. Then we are getting into an argument about which experts views we should be accepting. And it doesn't really matter. Frelke 21:59, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasley phrase about TeX 

message: I suspect that the Fairchild that is intended here is Fairchild Semiconductor, but I have no idea where to find a source for it. If someone knows sources for this info, citation would be excellent. -Sopoforic 02:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digital era - Fairchild 

message: The stone carving article says "Stone carving that is done to produce lettering is more often referred to as Lettering."  which was forwarded to this page.  However there is no discussion of Lettering on this page.
I do not think that typesetting is the correct place for forwarding lettering and the discussion does not seem to have any details on stone carving of symbols, letters. Any ideas on where it might have gone? Synapse001 13:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The original redirect was to Calligraphy, which doesn't deal with your question either. It does seem to be a better fit, however, and I'm inclined to change it back, subject to any objections.  --Old Moonraker 14:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK no objections I'll revert it to Calligraphy. Synapse001: sorry I couldn't help with your question – it's something that should be in.  --Old Moonraker 10:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Old Moonraker 06:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lettering  

message: The integral on the image showing int(f(x),0,3) is mathematical nonsense. The integral is definite integral, while the result on the right side of the equation is antiderivative. The simplest solution is to remove bounds of the integration.
212.2.99.88 11:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in integral 

message: A list of minicomputer-based typesetting software, said to have originated in the 1970s, included Xyvision. But Xyvision was incorporated, and shipped its first product, in the early 1980s. Therefore, I added "and 1980s" to the wording. Publius3 05:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1970s and 1980s 

message: "Stickfight is a fun little interactive time-waster"
On Wikipedia it looks more like vandalism. This edit reverted and user warned. --Old Moonraker (talk) 08:32, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: xkcd readers have a history of starting concerted, time-wasting edit wars on Wikipedia and this reference to the comic made me think that this may be another one. Second opinion requested at WP:ANI. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stickfight 

message: I went ahead and removed this. It was commented out by someone else, and as another editor said, it's baloney - especially the last line:
"TeX is a very powerful typesetting system used in many applications other than mathematics. The Editora graphical user interface written by D. Klutz, using TeX as typesetting engine, offers a powerful pagination tool for Classified Ads Newspapers and Magazines.
Editora is used by the major Classified Ads Newspapers and Magazines
in France.
The 12,000 pages landmark French dictionary Le Robert edition 2003 was typeset by TeX in less than 10 minutes."
--72.193.56.159 (talk) 07:42, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baloney in a code comment in the TeX paragraph 

message: I don't want to write an article, but as a participant in some of the events cited in the typesetting article, I'd like to mention a few things.
On the history of photocomposition
Higonnet and Moyroud were the inventors of this, during WWII is my understanding. They were hiding out in Lyon, France, during a portion of the war and spent all that time working on their first prototype.
Afterwards, they founded Lumitype in Paris and Photon in Cambridge, Mass. I knew them both in the 1960s and was familiar with various of their machines.
Computer typesetting was given its first serious impetous by Professor Griffith at MIT in the late 1950s and early 1960s. He worked with Higonnet and Moyroud to obtain from Photon a stripped down version of their Photon 540 machine to use with a computer. He was interested in enabling university professors to publish at a lower cost than was the case at that time.
He created an elaborate typesetting language that I can't remember the name of right now for that purpose, designed to be used by the professors. Their texts would be processed on an IBM computer, maybe the 1620, I'm not sure and run on the 540. I think the markup language may have been called 'Typrint'.
While this was a serious and significant effort, it was in the main an experimental project. The first production typesetting program was written by myself and Dow Parkes for the Los Angeles Times newspaper in 1962. The Vice President of Production, Otis Booth, went to a seminar on computer typesetting at MIT in 1961, where the work of Professor Griffith was demonstrated and discussed. He came back to Los Angeles, sought bids from various computer manufacturers and bought an RCA 301 computer. I was sent out from New Jersey to do the program. It was done under great secrecy because Norman Chandler, the Publisher, was afraid of union and other agitation.
I did the programming and Dow Parkes worked out the logic of the hyphenation program, which was done by simple rules coded into logic tables.
This program went into production on December 12th, 1962. In January we got a great deal of media attention and had local and national TV news coverage, an article in Time Magazine, and cover stories in media publications, such as Quill. In the summer of 1963, RCA announced a newspaper typesetting system, called Newscom, which was a stripped down version of the RCA 301, with a version of my program that I produced under contract to RCA.
Royirwingift (talk) 06:04, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eyewitness information 

message: Is typesetting covered by copyright? Somebody suggested this case could be relevant Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.. Palosirkka (talk) 07:24, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typesetting and copyright? 

message: I created an english caption file on commons for the dutch language video in the phototypesetting section (shown again right). As english is not my native language (dutch is) and it was already quite hard to squeeze in the text, which is spoken fairly rapidly, I think it would be a good idea if somebody has a look there for copy editing. This is the only place on the english wikipedia where this file is linked, so mentioning it here may generate some attention. Dutch captions are also present, for people who can read dutch but can't understand it when spoken. PiusImpavidus (talk) 01:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy editing 

message: The first sentence of the Digital era section reads as follows:
Linking to Cathode ray tube without first specifying it as a type of monitor seems a little clumsy, and potentially confusing for readers unfamiliar with the term. It's a very technical page. 
I propose one of the following changes:
* Changing the link to History of display technology#Cathode ray tube
* Taking out "cathode ray tube" entirely and replacing it with "computer monitor."
* Changing the text to read: "The next generation of phototypesetting machines to emerge were those that generated characters on a cathode ray tube monitor."
This could also be linked as:
 cathode ray tube monitor ("...on a cathode ray tube monitor"),
or as a single link to 
 cathode ray tube monitor ("...on a cathode ray tube monitor"). 
If this is not technically correct (I'm not familiar with how magnetic tape would get rendered on an electronic display, or if this would count as a computer monitor), "display" might also work here without generating confusion. 
I'm going to make a preliminary change just adding "display" to the sentence, but leave this up for discussion for those with more knowledge on the topic. 97.113.26.134 (talk) 05:59, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cathode-ray tube link (Digital era)