Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dogie.macc.wisc.edu!decwrl!shelby!csli!dayglow
From: dayglow@csli.Stanford.EDU (Eric T. Ly)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Infor. request: Any speech recognition package running on NeXT?
Message-ID: <12185@csli.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 10 Feb 90 01:43:12 GMT
References: <90037.142726BONQC@CUNYVM.BITNET> <28325@brunix.UUCP> <348@egg-idINEL.GOV>
Sender: dayglow@csli.Stanford.EDU (Eric T. Ly)
Reply-To: dayglow@csli.stanford.edu (Eric T. Ly)
Organization: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford U.
Lines: 21

In article <348@egg-idINEL.GOV> rhp@INEL.GOV (Robert Powell) writes:
>...
>-  An unrelated side-note:  I recently asked our regional NeXT rep when
>  Write Now would have underlining, and here's what he told me (he heard
>  this word-of-mouth at NeXT, so it's not guaranteed to be 100% factual,
>  though it sounds plausible to me):
>	The author of Write Now considers underlining to be the grade-
>	school equivalent of italics.  So since the word-processor has
>	italics, there is no reason to support underlining.
>...

I remember being told sometime ago that underlining was invented to
get around the problem of typewriters which couldn't handle having
both plain and italicized (oblique) versions of a typeface.  Typists
used underlined words to indicate what would be italicized words in
typeset documents.  But now that we don't have this limitation on our
printers, there's really no need to use it unless some graphic effect
is to be achieved, I guess.


						Eric Ly