Am 21. Jul, 2002 schwätzte Lee Einer so:

> There are several formats which are likely to meet everyone's needs.
> Text would do, assuming that we are discussing content rather than

I think the particular piece Bob was posting would've been best disbursed
via text and then formatted for printing when it was ready to go. Others
don't necessarily do things the same way I do. My way isn't necessarily the
best way.

> format. PDF documents can probably be read by everyone on the list,
> but I realize that not everybody is able to write to PDF format, which

PDF is almost, but not quite, an open format. While we might want to
encourage other orgs to use it ( if it's functional ), I don't think we want
to use it as there are better alternatives.

> is a disadvantage. HTML documents can be read by anybody, regardless
> of the OS or office suite they use.

Yeah, html is what I use, but it sucks for 'professional' looking dead tree
formats.

Maybe we can get some of our XML gurus to explain how we can use XML to
use open, free standards for documents.

Whatever we want to encourage needs to work for on line use as well as dead
tree format. I'd love to be rid of dead tree format, though.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
#  https://www.LuftHans.com/
#  Nobody grows old merely by living a number of years.
#  We grow old by deserting our ideals.
#  Years may wrinkle the skin, but to give up enthusiasm
#  wrinkles the soul.  -- Samuel Ullman