Constantine Daskalakis
> >Schemes haven't been documented yet for good reasons,
> >because they are not yet stable. That is, StataCorp
> >are following the logic Constantine mentions. They
> >don't want to provide documentation which will then
> >later be broken. However, scheme documentation was
> >promised at the Boston meeting as coming pretty soon.
>
> This is incorrect Nick. Perhaps you have not read the
> graphics manual as
> carefully as I have. There are plenty of graphics options that are
> documented in the manual. I can give a huge list. Also, and
> more to the
> point, quoting from the manual, "Making your own scheme" [G, p.470]:
I don't regard schemes as _fully_ documented.
That's what I should have said. I was aware
that they are mentioned in the graphics manual,
which I must read carefully some day.
> >Also, freezing Stata between releases, apart from
> >fixes, commits StataCorp to elephantine pregnancies
> >and deprives keen users of lots of nice things in the
> >interim. Just witness how interested several people are
> >in the enhancements to -ci, binomial-.
>
> Again, some caution in revisions does not take us to
> "elephantine pregnancy"!
> And there is a huge difference between adding features (-ci,
> binomial-) and
> changing basic things (color schemes).
Glad you don't mind features being added.
> It's all nice and well for people like you who are really
> into Stata and
> for people who never bother with manuals and simply ask "how
> do I do this?"
> for every little question they have. But what about the ones
> in the middle
> who really try to figure things out from the documentation?
Good question. I always keep referring from the -whatsnew- section,
which makes clear what's been added since release, and so
will not be covered in the manual.
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
