wow. have i gotten mail from techno-dweebs about this one, me the
techno-elite defender of postscript as a document interchange format
> And for those of us who are stuck reading this mailing list in our off
> hours, who have to read it at home over a 2400 baud modem, without
> X windows? Yes, I see how foolish I am being.
so read it at work, or print it and take it home. sounds like a personal
problem to me.
or use this as a justification to your employer enter this decade
before it's over.
> And no, I don't want to unsubscribe from this list -- Why couldn't
> something like that be posted in cleartext form, or ZIP'd, and
> if someone wants to enscript it on their end they can?
sigh. people who are technologically challenged will often insist we
all conform to the lowest common denominator. well, i claim that
right around now +- a year, the lowest common denominator for high
tech workers in developed countries starting rising to include
so if you're hip, you can handle it; it you're square, you can't.
are you the sort of person who would insist that recordings be put out
on vinyl because cd players aren't yet universal and you don't have
one at home and work? so you can't keep up with pop culture, why does
anyone owe you that? you probably have a phone with a rotary dial at
so instead you insist that no paper we circulate have graphics in it
just for your convenience.
there are more interesting lowest common denominator problems (to me,
anyway) than techno-wannabes whining that postscript isn't as
convenient for them to read as ascii:
blind people are disenfranchised by gui-based programs.
primary school computing is still subsisting on apple ii and even commodore pets.
(but ghostscript runs even on dos and vms).
i would agree with a statement that postscript is less handy for
informational retrieval because of the absence of indexing/full-text
retrieval tools for it. but i'm sure that none of you whiners care
about that because you don't have any disk space to spare for such a
purpose nor the spare cpu cycles to index it in any case.
i would agree that people in less developed countries might not have
easy access to the information contained in a postscript document.
but this paper is written in American English. There goes most of the
btw, your suggestion that a text file be zip-ed rules out some of the
people you suggest postscript would disenfranchise.
but you're all right, and to return to the subject of firewalls, i
really do believe that anyone feeble enough to have no way of figuring
out how to read or print postscript probably also has nothing
interesting to say about the content of a firewalls document
distributed in postscript. Please prove me wrong.
mark seiden, mis @
com, 1-(415) 665 8117 (voice)