🚀 go-pugleaf

Regarding the content of USENET-distributed programs: you get what
you pay for.  Just as reading USENET can (usually) be justified by
the 5% of postings that contain useful information, the "free"
distribution of software that USENET provides can be justified by
the gems that come out of it.  (Yes, I know that USENET isn't free,
but most end-users don't see the cost.)

The definition of "useless" programs and "gems" is highly subjective,
and I'm not foolish enough to say what programs I think belong in
either category, so I'll pass along to the issue of documentation
format.

MacWrite is the closest thing to a universal Macintosh document
standard that we have.  Of all Macintosh users, the largest percentage
of those who have any sort of word processing software can read
MacWrite-format documents.  MacWrite documentation can include
pictures and other material which can't be included in "text-only"
form.  It is unfortunate that not everyone has MacWrite, but I don't
believe that this justifies giving up the extra information by changing
to text-only.  (Speculation: I wonder how hard it would be to develop
a program to display (only) and perhaps print MacWrite files.  Would
the removal of all editing capabilities greatly simplify it?)

I agree that it is frustrating to concatenate multiple pieces of
a single BinHex file and download it in order to discover what it
contains.  Perhaps we should try to encourage a standard format for
software distribution which includes a plain text index of all of
the items in the BinHex/PackIt file and a summary of the software's
function.  This index would ideally be small enough to accompany
each part of a multi-part BinHex distribution (so that if part 2
arrives first you'll know if it is worth saving).
-- 
  John Bruner (S-1 Project, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory)
  MILNET: jdb@mordor.s1.gov		(415) 422-0758
  UUCP: ...!ucbvax!decwrl!mordor!jdb 	...!seismo!mordor!jdb