Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.apps:4796 comp.sys.mac.misc:9924 comp.sys.mac.programmer:22889 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!midway!midway.uchicago.edu!francis From: francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: PROPOSAL - Archive Standard Message-ID: Date: 21 Mar 91 19:11:51 GMT References: <1991Mar20.181449.29057@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1991Mar21.123303.9895@gorm.ruc.dk> Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator) Organization: Mathematics Department, University of Chicago Lines: 26 In-Reply-To: jba@gorm.ruc.dk's message of 21 Mar 91 12:33:03 GMT In article <1991Mar21.123303.9895@gorm.ruc.dk> jba@gorm.ruc.dk (Jan B.Andersen) writes: While everybody seems to agree, that its _a good thing_ to keep the compression formats open, so one is able to examine the stuff on Unix- boxes or PC's, why don't the same argument hold for documentation? Correct me if I'm wrong, but formats like [nt]roff, tbl and pic are open and available on several platforms (except Mac??). Why can't we stick with these? 'cause they stink. :-) (Or, at least, [nt]roff does--don't know the others.) Some flavor of TeX might be good. The main reason is that our Mac apps our *much* nicer to create with. Anybody know of an app that'll create TeX output with a Mac user interface? -- /============================================================================\ | Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.| | Department of Mathematics |=============================================| | University of Chicago | Until you stalk and overrun, | | francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | you can't devour anyone. -- Hobbes | \============================================================================/