From Keith.Bierman@eng.sun.com Wed Aug 26 19:35:04 1992
Received: from Sun.COM by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8)
	id AA25384; Wed, 26 Aug 92 19:35:04 +0200
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (zigzag-bb.Corp.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA27937; Wed, 26 Aug 92 10:35:06 PDT
Received: from chiba.Eng.Sun.COM by Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA24892; Wed, 26 Aug 92 10:35:07 PDT
Received: from localhost by chiba.Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA08145; Wed, 26 Aug 92 10:34:53 PDT
Message-Id: <9208261734.AA08145@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM>
To: walt@netcom.com (Walt Brainerd)
Cc: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.182) Processing Words 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Aug 92 09:53:55 PDT."
             <9208261653.AA07240@netcom.netcom.com> 
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 10:34:52 PDT
From: Keith.Bierman@eng.sun.com
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29



> 		Complete SGML support before our next rev of the 
> 		standard.

>I would like some details on what this means.  Importaion of SGML

I do not speak for Frame. Frame has user group meetings in various
"major" cities; Mountain View is one such place. 

>This goes to my question: What are people NOT on the editorial
>committee expected/required to do with the document?  This comment
>assumes everyone will be working with the document in the same
>form that it is maintained.

To whatever extent they *wish* to. Clearly, if I write a proposal I
should be *able* to submit it in a form which the editors can easily
handle. It is in my interest to do so, as it means that I know
precisely how it will come out. It is in the Editors best interest
because it makes for less work.

However, for the disadvantaged who may not have the right
tool/macros/whatever we will, no doubt, continue to accept anything
that can be photocopied ;>

>Everyone must be able to READ to document.  I assume we are not

The document can be printed. Those with even modest interest can use a
postscript viewing tool (the FSF makes such things available for zero
cost). 

>are there other possibilities?  And maybe even PS is not universal

It is universal enough. Going to meetings is not free, etc. In any
event, hardcopy can be produced for those who are technologically
disadvantaged. 

>translator from the output of these formatters to PS.  I have

The location of the flaw is uninteresting. I merely made the
observation that these tools, used in the usual ways, usually produce
.ps files which other tools (which rely on the Adobe structuring
conventions being observed) may not like. I have no trouble printing
such things; I do find it hard to read them online. Since printing is
easy, I have never pursued the matter (other than to file a bug report
against the postscript viewer in question). 

>to someone on WG5 who does not own Frame, but wants to find all
>occurrences of "formatted" in order to write a proposal?

That can be done via a imperfectly formatted ASCII and the hardcopy.
That this is harder for that individual doesn't bother me; if they
want easier access they should acquire the bloody software.

>Maybe my question was not clear.  X3J3 has already developed "special
>tools", such as the one that generates Annex D.

Which is fine, if those who will be maintaining the plethoria of
planned documents wish to use troff.

Our needs are not that exotic; WORD can be used effectively or NISUS
or whatever. Picking one, *any* one will make life easier for us all.

Picking the LCD, ASCII plus markup will make life equally difficult
for us all.