From maine@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov Tue Feb 21 21:46:58 1995 Received: from altair.dfrf.nasa.gov by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA28232 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Tue, 21 Feb 1995 22:46:58 +0100 Received: by altair.dfrf.nasa.gov (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA04616; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 13:46:58 +0800 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 13:46:58 +0800 From: maine@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov (Richard Maine) Message-Id: <9502212146.AA04616@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov> To: martin@ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov Cc: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk In-Reply-To: <199502212032.AA26079@dkuug.dk> (martin@ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov) Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.722) Document Form Content-Length: 2213 X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 On Tue, 21 Feb 95 12:32:25 PST, martin@ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov (Jeanne T Martin) said: > There are some new JTC1 document guidelines that go into effect Mar. 1. .... > 4. FILE FORMAT > For distribution and archiving purpose, the RFT (Rich Text Format) should > be used as the format of choice. The following file formats are also > acceptable: > - MSWord version 2.0 or later. > - Wordperfect version 5.1 or later. > For documents embedding graphics, the graphics shall be editable by the > MS DOS or MS Window edition of a wordprocessor or editor funtionally > compatible with the above file format. I hope that "guidelines" means that this isn't mandatory. It is a little late to switch word processors after several years of working on the f95 draft with Frame. I don't own or have more than token experience with either of the above-mentioned word processors or anything that uses RTF. Frame does come with utilities named miftortf and miftowp, but I have no way of verifying what would result from using these on the f95 document. We would be operating on blind faith that any document processed through these utilities would print anything particularly close to the document we have been preparing. The f95 draft uses enough of the features of Frame that I would *not* think such blind faith would be well advised. I do not, by the way, have time to learn a whole new editor in the next couple of months. It took longer than that for me to attain my current meager familiarity with Frame. Frame is not (by a long shot) my favorite editor, but the decision was made several years ago to prepare the f95 draft with it, and I've abided by that decision. If someone else wants to handle conversion of the Frame source to RTF and the verification of the result, that's fine. I'm going to be hard pressed to find the time to get everything done even in Frame, without the extra complications of working with some new (to me) format. (I interrupted proofreading of the recent changes in order to write this reply - only about 1 week left before the 95-007r0 deadline). Most of the rest of the guidelines looked pretty innocuous to me. -- Richard Maine maine@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov