liam%cs.qmc.ac.uk@CS.UCL.AC.UK (William Roberts) (02/11/86)
I have just received a copy of TranScript release 2.0, which has a DITROFF-output to PostScript conversion program called psdit. Adobe have decided that it would be a good thing to add a way of inserting something into the INPUT of this filter which causes user-supplied PostScript to appear in the output: this is a good idea and one I have implemented myself (yes, we have a source licence). However, Adobe have added this feature in an extremely violent and destructive way, i.e. one which is NOT transparent to other DITROFF postprocessors. The scheme is as follows: (Am I about to violate a non-disclosure agreement? - I doubt it...) extend the DITROFF language by adding the construct %\n your postscript here this all goes direct into the output .\n THIS IS A VERY BAD IDEA! All other DITROFF output constructs are single line things and this goes entirely against the grain. My own scheme was to add the following comment conventions: #include filename #%postscript command which copy into the output the contents of <filename> and <postscript command> respectively. Because the # means comment, any unmodified postprocessor will ignore these instructions. Another viable scheme is to add extra device control functions or extra drawing functions to do a similar thing - most drivers simply ignore functions that they don't support. IF WE ALL BOYCOTT THIS SCHEME, MAYBE ADOBE WILL CHANGE IT INTO SOMETHING MORE SENSIBLE..... ------- William Roberts ARPA: liam@cs.qmc.AC.UK Dept of Computer Science or liam%qmc.cs@cs.ucl.ARPA Queen Mary College UUCP: liam@qmc-cs.UUCP LONDON, UK