ISO books of official Python docs

[Terry Reedy]

"Doug Morse" <morse at edoug.org> wrote in message 
news:slrnfoae1t.c2f.morse at ikrg.com...
| Hi Fredrik,
|
| I'm terribly confused.  You want me to apologize for recommending that 
someone
| buy your books?  To apologize for noting that they are a quality 
reference
| sources for Python?

As a past and future technical writer, I can understand Fredrik's reaction. 
Your recommendation seemed somewhat lukewarm to me ("So, while not exactly 
what you asked for, the ORA books might be a viable alternative if what you 
want isn't available" ) and looking back at the original, I do not see 
'quality' anywhere.  If someone thinks of the docs as low quality, as some 
do, then labelling others' work as a reproduction would imply the same of 
the reproduction.

There is a HUGH difference between a 'reproduction' and an intended-to-be 
more literate and readable writing that covers the same material.  (I have 
not seen Fredrik's book, so I cannot comment on how well he succeeded.)

Terry Jan Reedy

| On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:59:34 +0100, Fredrik Lundh 
<fredrik at pythonware.com>
| wrote:
| >  Doug Morse wrote:
| >
| > > Several of the O'Reilly & Assoc. books -- such as Python in a 
Nutshell, The
| > > Python Standard Library, etc -- are in large part reproductions of 
the
| > > official docs and references.
| >
| >  if you're using "reproduction" to mean "copy", I think you owe both me
| >  and Alex a big apology.