Re: The New Zork Times


11 Jul 1995 16:14:00 -0500

In rec.arts.int-fiction,rec.games.int-fiction, you (jsomers@marcam.com (Jeff Somers)) write...
+ In article <DBBrL4.74s@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>, svanegmo@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (Stephen Van Egmond) writes:
+ |> >what form I should do so. There are a few options:
+ |> >
+ |> >1) Scan in the entire pages, save as graphics
+ |> >
+ |> >2) Scan in text and graphics separately
+ |>
+ |> Consider consulting with Volker Blasius to see if he has any converns or
+ |> opinions on the matter (volker.blasius@gmd.de).
+ |>
+ |> The difficulty with scanning graphics is that you need to use a
+ |> reasonably standard representation so that not too many people are left
+ |> out in the cold. What does that leave, DVI? GIF? PostScript?
+ [cut]
+
+ How about two versions: text only, and PDF format? Like the XYZZY
+ magazine uses. I have no idea if creating a PDF document involves
+ buying a commercial product or not, I'm just throwing this out for
+ consideration. This way, most people could view the graphical version
+ on a Mac or in Windows, and people who don't want to bother with
+ downloading the graphics can simply get the text versions.

PDF does require Adobe's Acrobat (paid version) to create. You probably
don't want to do that. I'd vote for gifs since all web browers support that.
Besides, GIF readers are plentiful and often still freeware/shareware.

I also vote for separate text and graphics.

-- 
     B E T T Y     L E E     | A human never stands so tall as when stooping
 Pegasus@Leland.Stanford.EDU | to help a small computer.          -- Infocom