[comp.sys.mac.misc] If you are going to post to comp.binaries.mac, read this!!!

ehanson@umbc1.umbc.edu (Mr. Erik Hanson; ARTS-SCI (UG)) (04/06/91)

If you sumbit an archive to comp.binaries.mac, *PLEASE* don't include 
readme files in Microsoft Word format!!

Some of us realize that Microsoft sucks (I mean we can't afford to buy
_another_ word processor)! 

Most readme files that I have seen don't need special formatting and would
be fine as text files. If it is absolutely necessary that you use different
fonts and have special formatting, try to save your document in MacWrite
format (not MacWrite II format). I believe every word processor can read that!

Or, save it in MacWrite AND Microsoft Word formats.

And while I'm complaining, it would be nice if the beginning of the post
gave a little hint as to what the program being posted actually does.

This isn't in response to one particular post, this is a problem that
occasionally occurs in comp.binaries.mac (and at sumex), and I'm starting
to get a little annoyed.


seeya!

Erik Hanson   University of Maryland, Baltimore County   ehanson@umbc2.umbc.edu

dburr@monsoon.Berkeley.EDU (Donald Burr) (04/06/91)

In article <1991Apr5.174838.13130@umbc3.umbc.edu> ehanson@umbc1.umbc.edu writes:
>If you sumbit an archive to comp.binaries.mac, *PLEASE* don't include 
>readme files in Microsoft Word format!!
>
>Some of us realize that Microsoft sucks (I mean we can't afford to buy
>_another_ word processor)! 
>
>Most readme files that I have seen don't need special formatting and would
>be fine as text files. If it is absolutely necessary that you use different
>fonts and have special formatting, try to save your document in MacWrite
>format (not MacWrite II format). I believe every word processor can read that!
>
>Or, save it in MacWrite AND Microsoft Word formats.
>
>And while I'm complaining, it would be nice if the beginning of the post
>gave a little hint as to what the program being posted actually does.
>
>This isn't in response to one particular post, this is a problem that
>occasionally occurs in comp.binaries.mac (and at sumex), and I'm starting
>to get a little annoyed.
>
>
>seeya!
>
>Erik Hanson   University of Maryland, Baltimore County   ehanson@umbc2.umbc.edu


I would like to amend to this.  It would also be nice if READ ME's were in
TeachText (or other type TEXT format), and the docs to the program can be
in MacWrite or Word or DocMaker or whatever you rlittle heart desires.

Also name the Read me files with "READ ME" in them.

That way, us souls with Stuffit Deluxe and/or Classic can get them to
automatically open up on opening the archive. Whee!

I know that I myself like to see the README when I open the archive, and
I'm sure others out there do too.
           2
Just my $ --- 's worth...
          100

______________________________________________________________________________
Donald Burr; Univ of California, Berkeley | America Online: DonaldBurr
INTERNET: dburr@ocf.Berkeley.EDU          |_Compu$erve:_72540,3071____________
      or: 72540.3071@compuserve.COM       |    "Send flames to /dev/null."

jcav@quads.uchicago.edu (john cavallino) (04/08/91)

In article <1991Apr5.174838.13130@umbc3.umbc.edu> ehanson@umbc1.umbc.edu writes:
>If you sumbit an archive to comp.binaries.mac, *PLEASE* don't include 
>readme files in Microsoft Word format!!
>
>Some of us realize that Microsoft sucks (I mean we can't afford to buy
>_another_ word processor)! 
>
>Most readme files that I have seen don't need special formatting and would
>be fine as text files. If it is absolutely necessary that you use different
>fonts and have special formatting, try to save your document in MacWrite
>format (not MacWrite II format). I believe every word processor can read that!

I maintain that simple README files should always be TeachText documents.
That is precisely the reason TeachText exists.  If you've written a manual
with more complicated formatting, then I must >reluctantly< agree that
providing it in MacWrite format is more polite than using MS Word.  It would
really be great, however, if somehow the lowest common denominator of Mac
word-processing formats could be raised to at least the level of WriteNow or
MacWrite II.  I mean, the old MacWrite format can't even represent footnotes!
[gripegripegripe]

    JohnC

-- 
John Cavallino                      |     EMail: jcav@midway.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago Hospitals     |    USMail: 5841 S. Maryland Ave, Box 145
Office of Facilities Management     |            Chicago, IL  60637
"Opinions, my boy. Just opinions"   | Telephone: 312-702-6900

roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (04/11/91)

jcav@quads.uchicago.edu (john  cavallino) writes:
> I maintain that simple README files should always be TeachText documents.

	No argument on that one from me.

> If you've written a manual with more complicated formatting, then I must
> >reluctantly< agree that providing it in MacWrite format is more polite
> than using MS Word.

	What would be really nice is if each word processor came with a
"read-only" version that was freely distributable.  That way, you could
write your manuals using whatever program you liked best and distribute
them with the "document reader" version so people could read them.  Said
version should allow people to view and print documents, but not change or
save them.

	Not that it really matters much in practice anyway.  I can't
remember the last time I saw a Macintosh that didn't have a hot copy of MS
Word on it.  :-(
--
Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy
"Arcane?  Did you say arcane?  It wouldn't be Unix if it wasn't arcane!"

hoepfner@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov (Patrick Hoepfner) (04/14/91)

roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) writes:

  [ ... deleted stuff ... ] 

>> If you've written a manual with more complicated formatting, then I must
>> >reluctantly< agree that providing it in MacWrite format is more polite
>> than using MS Word.

>	What would be really nice is if each word processor came with a
>"read-only" version that was freely distributable.  That way, you could
>write your manuals using whatever program you liked best and distribute
>them with the "document reader" version so people could read them.  Said
>version should allow people to view and print documents, but not change or
>save them.

   This is what Claris' XTND is all about.  This would allow every word 
processor to read and write every other!  Each word processor would be 
responsible for creating that little file that is placed in the appropriate 
place so that you can then read another file format.

   The other option is to use Microsoft's RTF format.  This is something 
that can even be e-mailed with out the need to BinHex it.  The only WPs 
which don't read RTF are MacWrite (before MacWrite II) and Nisus.  If these 
allowed RTF reading/writing then RTF would be the format of choice.

   Just my two cents... 

      +--------------------------+---------------------------------------+
     /    Patrick Hoepfner       |    NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center    \ 
    / America Online: PatrickH9  | Internet: hoepfner@heasfs.gsfc.nasa.gov \ 
   +-----------------------------+------------------------------------------+