Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1991 15:28 PDT
From: "Ned Freed, Postmaster" <NED(_at_)HMCVAX(_dot_)CLAREMONT(_dot_)EDU>
This does not answer my question. Can I modify either one of them reasonably
without having the FrameMaker application handy? Are either of them
meaningful
in any way if I don't have an image viewer?
I claim that for PostScript, TeX, and other subtypes grouped under Text-Plus,
the answer to these questions is yes. You have not answered my question in the
affirmative for FrameMaker yet. If you do, then it belongs under Text-Plus.
If you do not, it belongs under image.
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 91 11:32:34 -0400
From: Greg Vaudreuil <gvaudre(_at_)NRI(_dot_)Reston(_dot_)VA(_dot_)US>
TEXT PLUS: Requires a text oriented display only. Application software
may enhance the appearance of the text, but IS NOT REQUIRED to
gather the general idea of the message. The message is fully
revisable by a knowledgeable operator without use of an
application program.
OK. Using Greg and your definitions, the SGML like Maker Interchange Format
(MIF) is human readable; it is at least as human readable as nroff or TeX.
The basic text is there; the document is headed by format definitions,
and each "paragraph" is a small section of text. For example, the
paragraph definition of a simple paragraph is:
<ParaLine
<TextRectID 7>
<String `Hello World'>
>
Now I know we've been spending too much time on Framemaker the
example (although it has been helpful to me personally since
I was a bit confused about some of the definitions).
But I still claim that due to "grouping" both MIF and the binary-maker
formats might be text-plus, even though only one is human readable.
However, I would understand (given Greg's clear definition of the
types) the wish to categorize the two frame formats in different
types.
Neil