Adam wrote:

> It occurs to me that as a newbie to FB^4 and to TWM, I might 
> contribute to the production of much needed docs for TWM. I'm rather 
> busy with another project right now, but it should ease off over the 
> holidays and I might make a start then. I think a newbie might do a 
> good job because being naive, I have yet to get over the "conceptual 
> hurdles" inherent in learning anything new. Example:
> If my wife, a retired school teacher, wrote 5 - 2 = ? on the 
> blackboard for kids who just learning subtraction, and explained that 
> this meant "five, take away two leaves what?", about 50% of the class 
> would shout "5". Perfectly logical too: take the number "2" out of the 
> expression and you're left with the number 5 and we won't worry about 
> those other symbols. They have failed to grasp the concept of making 
> this equation into "remove two objects from a set of five objects and 
> there are three left". They're dealing with the numbers themselves as 
> the objects instead of making the required abstraction to a set of 
> unnamed objects.
> As a first effort (and part of my own learning experience) I could try 
> to describe every element on Bernie's pallets by looking it up in 
> Staz' "Switching to Future Basic" handbook and in the other materials 
> that come with FB^4. I would post these to Bernie for his comments, 
> and they can be refined as we went along. This won't be fast - it's a 
> spare time thing - but I'd like to do it, I have a lot of experience 
> writing techie stuff (I'm a retired engineering professor, ex-Head of 
> a department, and ex-Dean of Engineering, now consulting to avoid 
> cobwebs).
>
> This is not yet a promise; I'm contemplating it - but if Bernie would 
> rather I not do it because of other plans, now's the time to say so.

Yes... do it!... please, please, please  :)

Thanks
Bernie