Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!ames!amdahl!pacbell!lamc!wet!epsilon From: epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: PostScript Versus ASCII Summary: Make software available Message-ID: <629@wet.UUCP> Date: 1 Oct 89 23:04:01 GMT References: <8909301233.aa05407@huey.udel.edu> <6373@ficc.uu.net> Reply-To: epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) Organization: Wetware Diversions, San Francisco Lines: 24 The ability to quote from RFCs into text-only mail is something I hadn't considered, and a valid point. So far the best suggestion I've seen is { complete PS, plain ASCII, illustrations } . Then we don't have to upgrade 118K+ sites. Just NIC.DDN.MIL. :-) I don't know how things are where you live, but in California if you don't have PostScript capability "at home" you go to the local copy shop with a diskette. Since they make a healthy profit on laser printing, having a "just the illustrations" package appeals to the save-every-nickel types. For text-only material, I still want the PostScript. For a small example, look at the Internet Resource Guide files on NNSC.NSF.NET. Everything's in both forms, the information's identical, but the PostScript is much easier on the eyes. Rather than argue about how widespread PostScript is, why not support software such as FSF's GhostScript that will make it unquestionably available to the neo-Luddites? -=EPS=- P.S. Authors don't need to assume responsibility for mailing hardcopies when the NIC already provides this service.