🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <ENAG.90Sep28195153@hild.ifi.uio.no>, enag@ifi.uio.no (Erik Naggum) writes:
 
> Yes, and the answer is unfortunately NO.  I learned that they do not
> even have machine-readable versions in-house, and that drafts are most
> often type-set anew for each version.  The same goes for CCITT, which
> is another paper-based standardizing body in the field of electronic
> information.  Amazing.

In article <1990Sep30.023741.9306@cbnewsi.att.com> hrs1@cbnewsi.att.com (herman.r.silbiger) writes:

> CCITT, or rather the ITU, of which CCITT and CCIR are part, is no
> longer "paper based."  All draft recommendations are produced
> electronically, using Microsoft Word for Windows, and are published
> in-house.  Editors and contributors are requested to submit their
> work in machine-readable form, and they have translaters for more
> than 20 proprietary formats.  By the end of this year submissions
> can also be made in ODA conforming to the level 26 DAP (CCITT Rec.
> T.505).

> These documents will also be accessible electronically by Study
> Group members through an interactive service called TIES.  TIES can
> be accessed through modem dialup and packet networks via the Swiss
> PTT.  Submission can also be via X.400 links.  The documents will be
> in Word format, and also ODA by the end of the year.

> CCITT is pursuing the possibility of electronic distribution, and
> has actually made a Telecom directory available electronically to
> purchasers of the paper version.  The electronic version is updated
> 4 times per year, the paper copy yearly.  The main difficulty with
> electronic distribution is not technology but obtaining payment for
> the information.

I'm confused.  Wednesday September 26th 1990, I attended a seminar
held at the Telco Research facility at Kjeller outside Oslo, chaired
by Bente Manns&aring;ker, who is the Norwegian Telco's representative
at SG VII (X. series, if VII is wrong -- it might be).  I asked her in
the Q&A period after her lecture whether CCITT used electronic or
paper documents for internal work, and she replied paper documents.
Not entirely happy with the answer, I approached her in the break, and
asked if CCITT disseminated drafts electronically to their members,
and whether drafts existed in some electronic form, available to the
respective Working Parties, etc, in general whether the process was
electronic or paper-based.  Again, she replied that everything was
essentially paper-based, but that individual WP members often had
contributions on "some PC format" diskettes.  She was not aware of any
common format or attempts to define such.

Now, who should I trust?  I got to know Manns&aring;ker a little, and
got the feel that she may not know the details of the work she is
dealing with, but that she does a very good job for the people in the
Working Parties and other researchers back here that she is
representing.  We discussed the new X.25 A-bit (for Type-Of-Address/
Numbering Plan Indicator (TOA/NPI)) and its implication for the
address block format, including a weak expression of intent in section
5.2.1.2.1/X.25 and lack of correspondance with Figure 5/X.25, which is
identical to Figure 4/X.25.  (Thanks to Kent England for pointing this
out to me, and giving me the chance to pursue this point.)

It was in reference to this seminar and this person that I said what I
said above.  If this is wrong, I may of course again be able to
impress her by knowing more about her work than she herself does...

However, she did say that the mass of paper that she received prior to
each SG VII meeting weighed fully 8 kg (~16#).  I would surmise that a
2400' tape would be a little easier to distribute, if they could.

I hope to get some more information on this, and I will most certainly
pursue it.

-----

As Barry Shein has mentioned repeatedly (I got the point the first
time ;-), paper copies complement electronic copies, they are not
inferior to them, and would not go away.  I have paper copies of all
the relevant RFC's for my work and interest, and I would happily pay
for them if that could further the good work done.  Laser printers may
be good enough for a lot of things, but real type-set paper copies,
nicely bound, would perhaps make the standards themselves a little
more "prestigeous."

Likewise, I have bought the ODA and SGML standards, as well as 1.8
shelf-feet of the CCITT Blue Book, but would _so_ like to "grep" for
some keyword, which I'm so used to with the Internet stuff.  Nothing
compares to books by the bedside, and for real studying, electronic
copies just don't do it.  (At least not for me; am I getting old at
young age? :-)

-----

Sorry for the use of "&aring;" in her name, but I guess you all know
how it looks when thus represented.

--
[Erik Naggum]		Naggum Software; Gaustadalleen 21; 0371 OSLO; NORWAY
	I disclaim,	<erik@naggum.uu.no>, <enag@ifi.uio.no>
  therefore I post.	+47-295-8622, +47-256-7822, (fax) +47-260-4427