# Logic [ed: Benjamin Martin]

Thanks, @christina.hendricks. Making the edits directly is fine since they’re already imported. The only wrinkle would be if I need to make comments outside the text (i.e. asking you questions, flagging things for myself to return to later, etc). Is there a feature in Pressbooks I could use for that?

If not, I’d probably flag those things in the google docs. On that note, I can’t seem to see any of the gdocs or gfolders for the Logic book. Could you try to re-send the invitation?

Hi @metatechne,

I just sent an invitation to the folder with the Logic docs. I think I was under the impression that you were on a bigger folder that included this one, but I think that’s not the case. At any rate, you should have gotten a link to that folder now.

As for making comments on the chapters outside the text…the only way I know how to do that is through hypothes.is, which can be enabled on the book itself. I have enabled it for the chapters and the frontmatter/backmatter (of which there isn’t much yet…I haven’t copied over most of those items from the other books yet). You should be able to see it if you’re logged into the book site and go to “visit book” and then go to the intro or one of the chapters.

Have you used that before? If you want to try it, we could make a private group for you and me so your comments wouldn’t be public. Not everyone needs to see the copy editing suggestings/questions I think!

Please let me know what you think. We can also just do it on the google doc versions of the text!

Great, thanks @christina.hendricks ! I have access to the gfolder now in addition to the Pressbooks chapters.

I’ve used hypothesis before but I think I’ll need to create a new account associated with the preferred email I’d want to use. I think it might just be easier to use the gdocs since those are available. (BTW, I plan on starting the edits tonight.)

I’d be happy to do the private-group option in hypothesis for the next book, though!

That makes sense, @metatechne! We are working on some formatting issues with the logical notation in the book, but the text remains the same from the google doc version to the Pressbooks version I think (the book editor did the importing into Pressbooks and I don’t think he changed anything in the process but I haven’t checked).

1 Like

FYI…I have been working on figuring out how best to do the logical symbols in this book (looks like LaTeX). See this thread where I asked the broader community about logical symbols and accessibility, plus some issues that have arisen with me working on the LaTeX for the symbols.

As per the discussion on the logical notation and accessibility thread, I am redoing the logical symbols using LaTeX in this book.

What that has meant is that in the truth tables, e.g., in chapter 3, if I use LaTeX for the top row with the logical notation it turns it into a different font than the rest of the table because the table is styled with a different font than the rest of the text (Lato, I think). So I just changed the font in the cells of the table using CSS (thank you web search for helping me learn how!) so that the tables are now all in the same font as the rest of the chapters (Crimson Text).

The text boxes are still in a different font, which I think it okay because they are a different sort of “thing” than the rest of the chapter. So were the tables but this just looks better I think, than having the header rows in the truth tables be in one font, and the rest of the tables (the T’s and F’s) be in a different font.

1 Like

Here are some further issues we have run into with the Logic book, which I have been discussing with the book editor @benjamin.martin and with @apurva, and which I’d like to move here just in case others can learn from them.

And Apurva and Benjamin, if you have thoughts on any of these, please do reply!

1. There are a few diagrams in one of the chapters, and the exercise solutions, that aren’t rendering well. See this screenshot for an example:

I was hoping we could do these in LaTeX but doing so with TikZ doesn’t work with MathJax, according to a discussion thread about logical symbols and accessibility.. We’re still working on that. It might be that we end up creating svg files and using alternative text to make the images accessible.

1. I am trying to figure out how best to render the arguments in standard form (with numbered premises and conclusions with a line between the premises and conclusion). In the google docs versions of the chapters we had them just as numbered text on different lines, with the last premise before the conclusion underlined to represent the line between the premises and conclusion. I think it’s more accessible (and it looks better) to have them be ordered lists with a horizontal line between using <hr> (I had to style the <hr> element using CSS to make it look right, which meant 1em left indent and also I’m playing with the width (30%, 40%, etc.). But to do this I have to end the ordered list before the horizontal line, and then start a new ordered list starting at a new number (e.g., if there are two premises, the conclusion is rendered with a new ordered list starting at number 3).

I don’t know how accessible it is to have one ordered list and then a new one starting at a new number after a horizontal line. Will that indicate that the three things are part of one, single argument?

1. In chapter 3 there are a few places where there are two sets of arguments with premises & conclusions side by side on a page, which is rendered using padding and then spaces or tabs I think. This seems like it might not work so well on all exports and might look strange on some browsers or sizes of windows. See the screen shot below:

I am not sure how best to do this sort of thing so that it is both accessible and renders well in all formats. I doubt a table would work well because the information is not really table-like (I’d have to add row and column headers and that doesn’t really fit here I think). We may just have to move these to be one after the other, vertically.

Thanks for the updates, and for moving over the conversation here so others can join.

For 1, I think we have a good solution in our thread about Logical symbols and accessibility. We will use MathJax to render equations written in LaTeX, and will use Inkscape to create SVG images of diagrams (like the one in your screenshot). The SVG images will be accompanied by alt-text to ensure that they are accessible.

Yes, I think they will, but I would be eager to hear from others who might be more certain.

I’ve pulled an example from the book to demonstrate what this might look like in the Text Editor (Christina, please correct me if this isn’t what you were describing):
<ol>
<li>All tigers are felines.</li>
<li>All lions are felines.</li>
</ol>
<hr/>
<ol start="3">
<li>/$\therefore$All tigers are lions. </li>
 </ol>
And below is what it would display like in the final book formats:

1. All tigers are felines.
2. All lions are felines.

1. /∴ All tigers are lions.

Avoiding the table format and simply displaying them vertically sounds like a good solution.

@christina.hendricks While you’re working out the LaTeX stuff, here’s a quick update:

• Chapters 1-5 are all set in Press Books except for some questions I had. You should have gotten some google-doc notifications, as I raised the questions there so that you’d have the context.

• Just need to copyedit the Solutions, References/Works Cited, and Further Reading.

1 Like

Thank you, @metatechne! Good to know we’re pretty close with copy editing of chapters. Soon (I hope!) I’ll have the symbols and diagrams issue solved. I’ll check on the questions you raised in the next couple of days.

We do still need to have the Acknowledgements written up, and we’re still waiting on a couple of author bios I think, so there’s a bit more copy editing before we’re completely ready with the content!

Sounds good, Apurva. And yes, that example with the ordered list is the kind of thing I’m thinking of. I’m going to see if I can do a bit more digging about the accessibility question regarding breaking ordered lists like that up. But right now that seems like the best way to handle those aspects of the text.

Awesome, thank you for confirming.

Let me know what you find! If others had any thoughts, please jump in and join the conversation.

@apurva I have managed to make one of the diagrams for the Logic book so far, using Inkscape. I used the Media Library to add it to the book and I can view it through the URL. What I don’t know how to do is have it show up in the chapter itself. Adding it like a normal picture doesn’t seem to work, so there is probably some other way to do it that I don’t know. Thanks for any help you can provide!

Oh, and I also just saw this github issue with SVG in Pressbooks, which says that as of November 2019 there were some issues with exporting SVG to epub and mobi. Is that still a problem, and if so, what might be the best course of action?

Hmm, thanks for sharing a link to the GitHub issue about SVGs in Pressbooks. I’ll need to do a little more digging to confirm whether that is still active or has been resolved, and will get in touch with the Pressbooks team about the display issue with SVGs.

The easiest alternative/solution I can see to both right now would be switching to JPEG files instead. The main reason we went with SVGs was to ensure good quality of the diagrams in the printed format, but this can also be achieved with large dimension JPEG images.

Let me take a look and reach out to the Pressbooks team, and report back.

Hi Christina, after chatting with the Pressbooks team, it’s clear that we should be switching tack to a file type that is better supported in Pressbooks: JPG, JPEG, GIF or PNG. Right now, the SVG format is only supported in images rendered via the MathJax plugin. The Pressbooks team has noted our interest in working with SVG files and will take this into consideration for future development. For now, they recommend we go with one of four file types (JPG, JPEG, GIF or PNG) for static images, which are fully supported in the Pressbooks webbook and export formats.