Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!uwvax!vanvleck!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!ucbvax!decwrl!sun!gorodish!guy From: guy@gorodish.Sun.COM (Guy Harris) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions Subject: Re: DWB ownership (was: vi vs emacs in a student environment) Message-ID: <58846@sun.uucp> Date: 5 Jul 88 08:09:12 GMT References: <399@cantuar.UUCP> <11418@steinmetz.ge.com> <6056@megaron.arizona.edu> <146@wash08.UUCP> Sender: news@sun.uucp Lines: 23 > >And in a posting a few days ago, someone said that SoftQuad's enhanced > >tools were the new official release of DWB. > > Many apologies, my misstatement - we're in the midst of > INteractive/SoftQuad wars at my job and I'm getting alittle confused! - > SoftQuad's formatters are the new, official documenters workbench. I think what the original poster *meant* was that SoftQuad's formatters were *derived from* "the new, official Documenter's Workbench", presumably meaning DWB 2.0. Unfortunately, they stated this in a fashion that could lead somebody to believe that they were claiming that SoftQuad's formatters *are* the latest DWB release; i.e. that there is a DWB 3.0, issued by AT&T, that is the same stuff that SoftQuad is shipping, or something such as that. The exact statement was: Softquad Publishing Software is the official new release of AT&T Documenters Workbench, and hence does indeed contain licensed software from AT&T. which would have been better stated as "SoftQuad Publishing Software is baded on the official new release...", unless they really *are* claiming that AT&T is just reselling SoftQuad's software, which I would find difficult to believe.