On Sun, 6 Jun 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote:
> >Well, I definitely agree with Tony on this.
>
> On which point, Sam?
On the point that the archive should be made accessible to as many people
as possible, and that means using formats and data that just about anyone
can read.
> Well, I don't, and for the reason that lowest common denominator means the
> lowest efficiency for the most people. I want to make it easy and
> accessible to as many people as possible. Based on statistics, that means
> that the only OS that really matters is . . . now say it along with me . .
Bullshit. There are more tools for viewing ASCII data than any other
format under every OS. This includes tools that allow you to search and
edit them. Just because most of the planet is stuck with a Microsoft OS
doesn't mean that all those people can also use a PDF viewer. I'm on a
Pentium 133 system and viewing PDF files is a pain in the ass.
It is also the most efficient format in terms of taking up the least
amount of storage space. I can download a textfile in a few seconds. I
can even view it with my web browser, and search it. I can cut parts out
and paste them elsewhere.
Making a
"public" archive in the sense that everyone should be able to view it
means catering to the lowest common denominator.
> I don't anticipate getting complete agreement from everyone. What has to be
> considered is (1) What do the owners of the data have to say? (2) What are
> the people willing to do the work willing to do? (3) Where are these
> documents to be stored and presented to the public and how much space will
> they allow for this purpose? (4) What will satisfy the needs and preferences
> of MOST of the people having access to the documents? The weight assigned
> to the answers will probably be in about this order as well.
What good is putting in all the effort when not many people will be able
to benefit from that effort? Contrary to what you think, the PDF format
is not that widespread. Sure there are viewers, and the format is
documented, but how many people have that plug-in or the stand-alone on
their computer? Now ask yourself, how many people have a text editor on
their computer?
> As far as I'm concerned, what's most important is that the documents be
> stored as complete, separate, and single files. They should not be broken
> up into pages or chapters or text in one part and graphics in another in the
> stupid, Stupid, STUPID way much of the LINUX documentation is published.
Not everyone with a Linux box has a SVGA monitor with gigabytes of hard
drive space and oodles of RAM. The developers of the Linux documentation
were smart enough to realize that. It allows you to get only what you
need, and not end up with a bunch of dead data taking up precious space on
your hard drive.
> Further, while GIF format is probably OK for your vacation pictures or the
> latest centerfold, I don't find it particularly advantageous for presenting
> line-art drawings because common viewers don't have a standard presentation
> format for them. They come in a size matched to some raster image and if
> your display matches it, great, else too bad. Again I prefer the PDF, not
> only because it is what most people can get and use for free, but because it
> is a single format useable in common for both text and graphics.
I can't view a PDF file with my (Apple ][, Commodore 64, Atari x00, TI
99/4a, TRS-80 Model x, Heathkit Hx, OSI Challenger x, IMSAI 8080, Altair
8800, etc).
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar_at_siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
See
http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 05/25/99]
Received on Sun Jun 06 1999 - 23:35:37 BST