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.