Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinions?
From: Nancy Gilson
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 07:16:34 -0700
Chad English wrote:
>
> Cons (for publishing):
> (b) For the case of publishing on the Web only (not published elsewhere):
> 1. How do you reference it? With the URL? URLs aren't permanent. They can change,
> machines go down, papers would be gone forever, etc. Without a widespread hardcopy
> publication, the paper really isn't "permanent".
>
> 2. Along the same lines, you can change a paper in HTML format. Again, it's not
> permanent. When somebody reads it and references it, there is no guarantee that it
> will say the same thing later.
> University professors, psychologists, professional editors, and the Navy
have been hashing this out for a few years. Examples for reference style
can be found at:
http://www.cas.usf.edu/english/walker/mla.html
http://gasolu.edu/psychweb/#tipsheet
http://www.uvm.edu/~xli/reference/estyles.html
http://www.nrlssc.navy.mil/meta/bibliography.html
http://www.eei-alex.com/eye/utw/96aug.html
Most have two things in common--cite the url AND the date you accessed
the information.
Talk to your writers and editors in your various departments. Software
exists out there that translates normal layouts to html easily. More are
being released daily.
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinion anyone?
From: tlowery@intersurf.com (Toney Lowery)
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 13:38:34 -0500
This is something that I've been waiting for.
BUT....
> 1) The peer-review process of scientific journals may take from many
> months to over a year.
>
> 2) The review process is often arbitrary in nature.
These two statements scare me a lot. As was noted in the PBS series "Life
on the Internet" (good series IMHO), information coming from the internet
still seems to have an importance and creditablity that is not given to
info coming from "traditional" methods. The series suggested that this may
be due to the newness of the medium.
This concern may not be as applicable to the scienitific community, but
the lack of peer review for all its faults is really the only assurance of
quality work. Even then I have my doubts on occasion :).
Richard Ottolini noted that...
> Almost every academic professional society has considered this issue
> and many started experiments in the area.
> One minor surprise is that some experiments (AIP) found it *more* expensive
> to publish a web journal at the same quality as a printed journal,
> probably because the screen QC tools aren't as good as for print,
> and publishers have to expand their personal to use the new technology.
> This may just be a transient phenomena.
I've a feeling that the costs will come down fairly rapidly. This
situation is probably akin to the cost of word processing and desktop
publishing. At first each was cumbersome and expensive. But as the
software got better the cost came down and the ease of use went up.
HTML publishing is getting easier every month. There are lots of new
software packages that can convert text and graphics directly from word
processing documents.
On my own wish list....
A service that works similiar to what is availible for newpapers. A
service that has articles from many journals scanned for a person's
keywords/topics and then sent via e-mail. Perhaps just sending the
abstract at first and then order the entire article if it is of interest.
Hopefully this could be done for a flat fee per year or on a per "article
requested" basis, depending on the user. Though free would be even better
:)
--
Toney Lowery
See and Say 'Hi' to Michael Anthony Lowery Born July 25, 1996 at...
http://www.intersurf.com/~tlowery/Michael.html
Soon to be graduating (MS Landscape Architecture)
alowery@tiger.lsu.edu
tlowery@intersurf.com
http://www.intersurf.com/~tlowery
"Easily Distracted by Shiny Objec... Hey! What's That!?!?"
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinions?
From: Chad English
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 15:42:28 -0400
Nancy Gilson wrote:
>
> University professors, psychologists, professional editors, and the Navy
> have been hashing this out for a few years. Examples for reference style
> can be found at:
> http://www.cas.usf.edu/english/walker/mla.html
> http://gasolu.edu/psychweb/#tipsheet
> http://www.uvm.edu/~xli/reference/estyles.html
> http://www.nrlssc.navy.mil/meta/bibliography.html
> http://www.eei-alex.com/eye/utw/96aug.html
>
> Most have two things in common--cite the url AND the date you accessed
> the information.
Those aren't too bad, but the problem that I was refering more to was someone reading
a paper, looking for the reference, and then finding that the url has changed. How
would one find it? There would certainly have to be an archive somewhere of every URL
for every paper and any changes made. The person could then search this archive for
the new URL. It might work, though I'm not sure how difficult it would be to maintain
such an archive, in addition to the archive of papers themselves.
--
("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._
`6_ 6 ) `-. ( ).`-.__.`) Chad English
(_Y_.)' ._ ) `._ `. ``-..-' cenglish@mae.carleton.ca
_..`--'_..-_/ /--'_.' ,' http://www.mae.carleton.ca/~cenglish
(il).-'' (li).' ((!.-'
Subject: Re: Question from a mech. eng
From: Russ Dodge
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 12:14:31 -0700
niemotka@tetraprec.com wrote:
>
> I am currently working on a project working with distance measurement
> using lasers, and was wondering if anyone could explain briefly how
> the "Total Station" survey equipment works. All I know currently is
> that the "transit" sends out a continuous laser beam that sweeps out
> in a circular pattern, and the rod has a receiver target that the beam
> hits.....any further info would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Niemotka
> niemotka@tetraprec.com
T S Blue wrote: The term "transit" commonly refers to an instrument
where angles are measured by reading a vernier scale, four screws are
available for leveling, a magnetic compass is an integral part, use a
physical device (such as a plumb-bob) for horizontal placement, and
are of an "open circle" design (don't worry about what this means).
The term "theodite" commonly refers to an instrument where angles
are measured by reading a (typically) direct reading optical micrometer,
three screws are available for leveling, a magnetic compass is typically
absent, use an optical device (such as a an optical plummet reflector)
for horizontal placement, and are of an "closed circle" design.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the statement "commonly refers to" is right the description is wrong. Almost all electronic, 3 screw
instruments are transits. Transits are instruments that are capable of producing a line 180 degrees from the
back sight by flipping the telescope over or "transiting" the scope, hence the name. The instrument has a
horiz. plate circle (with angles etched on it) that is mounted on the centerline of the base. A theodolite does
not necessarily position the plate on the centerline of the instrument. In this case the plate can not be set
to zero and must be read on both sides and averages taken. Usually several sets of angles are turned. The open
or closed circle is not an issue. Theodolites are for the most part instruments for accurately measuring
angles and not setting angles.
Most EDM's are not laser systems. The infrared systems send out a narrow beam of light that may be several feet
wide at 2000m. The light is also sent out in more that one frequency (course and fine portions of the
measurement). Hundreds or thousands of light pulses can be sent to make one measurement. The phase shift of
the light wave is measured and statistical deviation of all the pulses is calculated. If it fits, you get an
answer, if not, measure again.
Russ Dodge LS WA #18081
Subject: Re: Trimble 4600LS GPS Receiver
From: dnt@canam.com
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 23:05:04 GMT
"PLR" wrote:
>I am looking for any information, sites, etc. for the Trimble 4600LS GPS
>Receiver.
>Also, has anyone had any experience using this instrument? Any help would
>be appreciated.
>Thanks
>Perry Raglin.
Perry,
I have used the 4600LS extensively on many cadastral and engineering
surveys in Alberta. It can't get much simpler. For us, it represents
excellent value for money. Our field crews find them easy to use and
reliable. Kinematic surveys, using the TDC1 data collector, are very
straight forward.
The only glitch I see is the integrated antenna, and it isn't a real
problem. When you need to elevate the unit on a rangepole or
magnetically mount it on a truck roof, it tends to be a bit topheavy.
One of our crews bounced one off the magmount on the truck roof at
about 40 km / hour onto a gravel road. They brushed the dust off of
it, re-iniitalized the survey, and away they went! I wouldn't
recommend repeating this torture test but it does indicate that they
are ruggedly constructed.
If you plan on running it on cold days, you probably want to use an
external drycell battery. The four C cells last less than an hour at
-20 celcius.
We're looking at adding 12 of them to our receiver pool.
Scott Partridge, P.Eng
Manager, GPS Services
Can-Am Surveys Ltd ph (403) 269-8887
900, 340 - 12th Ave SW fx (403) 269-8550
Calgary, Alberta em: dnt@canam.com
T2R 1L5
Visit our website at http://www.canam.com
Subject: Re: Surveyors ?
From: acresurvey@aol.com (AcreSurvey)
Date: 12 Sep 1996 19:12:45 -0400
In article <01bb9ce7$0b74c100$69dc82cd@pjmorela>, "Moreland"
writes:
>Any surveyors out there? I'm a Maryland public Surveyor. I subscribed to
>this group a few days ago, am I the only one here?
I'm here,
Jon Tabas, PLS, PE
Langhorne, PA
ACRE Engineers and Land Surveyors was established in 1984. We provide
Consulting Services, Civil Engineering Design and Land Surveying Services
to individuals and companies in Southeastern Pennsylvania and Southern New
Jersey. The firm is owned and operated by Jonathan J. Tabas, PE, PLS.
Mailing address: P. O. Box 600, Feasterville, PA 19053-0600 TEL: (215)
752-2000
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinions?
From: kkereke@iamerica.net (Kirk Kerekes)
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 19:33:32 -0500
In article <323867A4.41C6@mae.carleton.ca>, Chad English
wrote:
- Nancy Gilson wrote:
- >
- > University professors, psychologists, professional editors, and the Navy
- > have been hashing this out for a few years. Examples for reference style
- > can be found at:
- > http://www.cas.usf.edu/english/walker/mla.html
- > http://gasolu.edu/psychweb/#tipsheet
- > http://www.uvm.edu/~xli/reference/estyles.html
- > http://www.nrlssc.navy.mil/meta/bibliography.html
- > http://www.eei-alex.com/eye/utw/96aug.html
- >
- > Most have two things in common--cite the url AND the date you accessed
- > the information.
-
- Those aren't too bad, but the problem that I was refering more to was
someone reading
- a paper, looking for the reference, and then finding that the url has
changed. How
- would one find it? There would certainly have to be an archive
somewhere of every URL
- for every paper and any changes made. The person could then search
this archive for
- the new URL. It might work, though I'm not sure how difficult it would
be to maintain
- such an archive, in addition to the archive of papers themselves.
If you have the title and the author (as in a normal reference) a few
moments with HotBot or one of the other web searchers will find the paper.
Why be overly concerned with URLs?
--
Kirk Kerekes
------------------------
___ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ___ _ ____ _ _
|__] |___ |__/ |___ |___ | | | | | |\ |
| |___ | \ | |___ |___ | | |__| | \|
is Not an Available Option
-----------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinion anyone?
From: gdmiller@igate1.hac.com (Gary D. Miller)
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 13:45:40 -0700
In article <3236561B.37C5@cerfnet.com>, oksi@cerfnet.com wrote:
First, this...
> THE RATIONALE IS AS FOLLOWS:
>
>
> 1) The peer-review process of scientific journals may take from many
> months to over a year.
>
> 2) The review process is often arbitrary in nature.
And then this...
>
> (A) Work submitted must be of original nature and of value to science or
> technology ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> ^^^^^^^^^^
Note underline, please.
The trick is, who decides whether or not a submitted contribution meets
this stated criterion? What is the _process_ by which a submission is
evaluated to ensure it has the requisite "value to science or
technology"??? Maybe someone with knowledge in the field should look it
over? Maybe several people? Maybe that would be called a "peer review"?
Anyway, how can a reader evaluate the "value to science or technology"
absent a peer review? I read several peer-reviewed journals covering
topics which I could not, on my own, evaluate for validity, legitimacy,
and so forth. My faith in the published material stems in large part from
knowing that they went through a serious scrutiny at the hands of real
scholars in the relevant field.
If anyone with modest resources can publish their writings into the
proposed database, then the chance of it being/becoming a useful research
source is small. I really like the idea of having a searchable database of
articles such as are described in this proposal, but only AFTER they have
gone through a peer review. Quality and believability are more important
(to me) than haste into print.
Just my $0.02 worth.
Gary Miller
gdmiller@igate1.hac.com
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinions?
From: John Alldred
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 13:09:41 GMT
In article <3237048E.41C6@mae.carleton.ca>, Chad English
wrote:
> [snip full srgument, for brevity]
> My conclusions are this:
>
> 1. The best way to go about publishing on the Web is to only put up works
> that are already published elsewhere (conferences, journals). This way
> the document is permanent, it has gone through peer review, and it has a
> permanent reference. (Even if the URL changes.)
>
> 2. Preferably it should be printed in pdf format if they ever make a
> cheap/free pdf writer and pdf readers become more integrated with
> Web browsers (you can already get plug-ins). For now, very carefully
> formatted HTML may have to do.
I would much prefer if documents on a Web-site were in HTML only (carefully
coded to ensure maximum information with minimum use of non-standard HTML
extensions) to ensure accessibility without any need for extra software.
Formatted documents (such as PDF as suggested below; or aguably any of
a large number of so-called "industry-standard" but actually "proprietary"
formats) would be more appropriately held (zip-archived) on a ftp-site,
to which the HTML-coded Web-site could contain links.
> PDF would also add to the permanence of the document too since it is a
> "printed" format like postscript, ie, you print to a pdf file (it is not
> directly editable), you don't save it that way.
As a further related thought, I believe that it would be helpful for
ABSTRACTS to be readily available (in plain non-extended HTML) from
a Web-site (as is done to a limited extent on my/our site);
the visitor could then choose whether to link to the full paper for
deeper investigation, and therefore be given the choice of
downloading a large HTML file that they can read,
a large non-HTML file which they can also read, or
a large non-HTML file that will require further software to read.
John Alldred
--
_
|_) _ _ |_ _ _ | _ http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/protovale
| | (_)|_(_)|_)(_||(-` (OXFORD)LTD protovale@argonet.co.uk
Subject: Re: Trimble 4600LS GPS Receiver
From: "J. Anthony Cavell, PLS"
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 09:49:25 -0500
PLR wrote:
>
> Greetings
>
> I am looking for any information, sites, etc. for the Trimble 4600LS GPS
> Receiver. I have already read the article in the July/August 1996 issue of
> Professional Surveyor.
>
> Also, has anyone had any experience using this instrument? Any help would
> be appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Perry Raglin.
Dear Perry:
Try a visit to: http://www.trimble.com/cgi/products.cgi/pd_ls005.htm
for info. on the 4600, or call me at 318-237-1413.
The 4600LS has proven itself to be very popular with the surveyor who
can't justify the expense of dual-frequency equipment but still want the
advantages of GPS in his practice. It is compact, "unitized" and very
simple to operate.
Regards,
--
J. Anthony Cavell, PLS _______ ______
Vice President /_____ / / @ \ /____ /
Navigation Electronics, Inc. /_____ /===(@ % @)===/____ /
200 Toledo Drive /______/ \ @ / /_____/
Lafayette, LA 70506 "G P S m a n"
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinion anyone?
From: rander+@elm.ius.cs.cmu.edu (Peter Rander)
Date: 13 Sep 1996 17:18:30 GMT
Since this discussion is about web-based publishing, I thought I'd throw
in a few web pointers.
To see the call for papers of a "new refereed, archival internet journal",
take a look at
http://www-mitpress.mit.edu/jrnls-catalog/videre.html
[In my opinion, peer review is a necessary process, even if it is painful and
imperfect. To "publish" without peer review, try posting to the appropriate
bboard -- and if you make a controversial claim, you will still get peer-
flamed^H^H^H^H^H^H reviewed. :-) ]
For an interesting essay on the concept of on-line publication, see
http://peipa.essex.ac.uk/vision-online/
The essay examines *why* we publish at all and what publication methods are
currently used and their drawbacks, and in this context explores online
publication, including an analysis of (some of) the pros and cons of several
potential online publication mechanisms. [This essay is entitled "Vision
Online: Electronic Publishing for Computer Vision", but the principles have
applicability far beyond computer vision.]
-Pete (rander@cs.cmu.edu)
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinion anyone?
From: "Alan S. Wicks"
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 10:11:08 -0700
I agree and support the concept. The problem I see is that it may be
that many of the scientific journals will not be happy about being
second in line for a paper though it could force them to provide
electronic subscriptions. However, for many University people,
advancement is based on publications in refereed publications. Unless
this attitude changes, and I have doubts about that happening quickly,
the best materials will still be published two years after the research
is done. However, a site such as you suggest could be used by such
researchers to publish interim reports. This could provide them with
feedback during the research process as well as establish and/or
maintain their presence in the field.
Alan S. Wicks
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinion anyone?
From: "Hugh Winkler"
Date: 13 Sep 1996 19:32:24 GMT
Why can't an electronic journal be refereed?
There could be two bins of papers, those submitted and those that have been
peer reviewed. If you want the latest, possibly flawed, information, you
browse the submitted list. You can offer your review too. But a high graded
group of reviewers would have to pass the paper to the final published
stage. They might consider the unsolicited reviews as well -- this might
improve the current review process.
-------------------------------------------
Hugh Winkler
Scout Systems hughw@scoutsys.com
Austin, Texas 512-452-3290
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinions?
From: Danny Rich
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 17:07:43 -0700
N. Gat wrote:
>
> Subject: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinions?
>
> I'd appreciate any pro and con arguments on the subject of this letter.
> Since this matter touches upon all the sci.*, many comp.* and other
> newsgroups, I'll try to cross post this message.
>
> The TechExpo Web site would like to open up a ScienceExpo section
> dedicated to the publication of scholarly works in HTML format (TechExpo
> already provides an array of services to the science & technology
> community; see http://www.techexpo.com).
>
> THE RATIONALE IS AS FOLLOWS:
>
> 1) The peer-review process of scientific journals may take from many
> months to over a year.
True but there are reasons for this.
>
> 2) The review process is often arbitrary in nature.
More true still ... This is mostly a barrier to young scientists.
>
> 3) The access to the work is limited because many libraries do not carry
> the journal, or it is too expensive for an individual subscription
>Not a problem for serious technologist who will have access to NTIS, ISI
and other search firms. I used to get notices across my desk each week
with lists of articles on topics of my interest only. I initialled the
ones that I wanted to read and by the end of the week I had them in my
hands. Computers and telecommunications were not invented by the
INTERNET.
> 4) A journal in any field carries work that is much broader than that of
> individual researcher or engineer so important papers are often obscured
> because they do not quite belong in any particular journal.
>So why bother reading the whole journal?
> 5) Because of the multi-disciplinary nature of technology and science,
> some topic have applicability in more than one field, and no journal or
> conference may cover such broad fields.
>No, but series technologists can and do.
> 6) Papers posted at ScienceExpo will be searchable not only by key
> words, but the author will be able to select any number of applicability
> categories from a list of over 400 existing categories (see the TechExpo
> classification schedule).
>
> 7) papers will be searchable via all the Web search engines.
>
> 8) The author can still submit the posted paper to refereed journals.
But will it be accepted? Most archival journals have strict rules about
prior publication of papers.
>
> PUBLICATIONS AT ScienceExpo WILL:
>
> a) Appear within 48 hours of submittal
>
> b) The paper will be immediately available to the entire community
>
> c) The paper will indexed and could be found by all researchers via the
> Internet search engines, or internal ScienceExpo search tools (using any
> keyword, author name, institution name, etc.)
>
> d) The author can select any number of fields of science and technology
> form a list of over 400 (see TechExpo Classification Schedule) to reach
> the target audience much broader than any one journal can
>
> e) Authors can hot-link all references directly from their paper
>
> f) On-line discussion of papers can be conducted within the appropriate
> UseNet groups
>
> g) Papers may be copies and printed or forwarded to others
> electronically or by other means.
>
> SOME PROPOSED GROUND RULES:
>
> (A) Work submitted must be of original nature and of value to science or
> technology
>
> (B) The paper must carry the full names of the authors and institution,
> including address, phone number, fax, and e-mail.
>
> (C) Ethical conduct: Papers posted at ScienceExpo should be treated as
> any other publication. They represent the scientific work of colleagues
> and should be treated as such. If information is quoted, the proper
> reference should be given credit.
>
> (D) When copying, forwarding, etc., the entire paper, including the
> authors information, institution, as well as the ScienceExpo source
> should be included.
>
> Obviously ScienceExpo will not referee papers; the authors' names and
> the institution they represent are put on the line -- so posting papers
> ON-LINE should be given as much or more care and thought as submitting a
> paper to prestigious journals
All of the above are both necessary and sufficient for this to be a
meaningful publication forum.
>
> A FEW TECHNICALITIES:
>
> (i) The entire paper must be submitted in HTML, and graphs, figures and
> charts in gif or jpg format (this is a deviation from common formats
> requiring PostScript or TEX, to allow viewing papers using the
> newsreader built into popular browsers, and to allow indexing such
> papers by all the Web search engines)
>
> (ii) Maximum size for text files and graphics will have to be observed
>
> (iii) Equation should be edited using the HTML specifications, or
> scanned and pasted as graphics files
>
> (iv) It is the author's responsibility to secure authorization of the
> institution and/or the research funding authority to submit the
> publication.
>
> Finally here is the most sticky point. If the service if totally free
> of charge, I'm concerned there will be a deluge of frivolous
> publishing. I consider a fee structure to act as a "potential
> Barrier." A low, yet significant fee (hopefully) will discourage the
> unwarranted publications, but will not be too high to discourage worthy
> publications. Perhaps academic institutions will receive a discount,
> but corporations will pay somewhat higher fee also to defray the costs
> of the service.
>
> So one question is whether a fee imposed on publication will completely
> stifle interest? Is for example, a one-time publication fee of $400 for
> a corporation, and $100 for academia too high a fee?
> Why do you assume that you must penalize industrial contributors?
Will their organizations pay the $400? If so, then you will have very
few contributions. My organization supports publicaition only in
journals without page charges. Second, you are far more likely to get
frivolous papers from individuals with no affiliation. What do you
charge them? What do you charge a student? How do you collect these
fees?
> One more comment as to why should TechExpo do this. In my opinion
> technical societies (and I belong to a few) could do the job but the
> problem of cross discipline relevance will not be solved. So being
> unaffiliated with any technical society or technical magazine, TechExpo
> is a neutral ground most appropriate for this job. What's more,
> TechExpo is already providing technology and science information for
> almost two years.
>
> Is this idea totally freakish?
>
> Well, the floor is now open for debate.
>
> Private communications are welcomed but posted comments/debate is
> preferred.
>
> Nahum Gat, Ph.D.
> President
> Opto-Knowledge Systems, Inc. (OKSI)
> Web: http://www.techexpo.com/WWW/opto-knowledge
>
> E-mail: oksi@cerfnet.com
> or
> nahum@techexpo.com
Danny Rich
Subject: Eagle Point, AutoCAD and You
From: "Henry C. Francis"
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:31:20 -0400
Thomas,
As you can see below, what has been reputed to be the greatest CAD
package in the world (AutoCAD) has some significant problems.
However, concentrating upon the problems does no justice to the worth of
the product. I'm sure you would not want to throw out AutoCAD because
you can't figure out how it is supposed to be used.
Likewise,
It would do no justice to you personally to focus upon your agreeing with
an atheist is his attack upon Christians and other religious people.
>>Re: Utter Futility of Arguing With Creationists
>>
>>>On Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:28:32, William R. Penrose wrote:
>>>There are no wars as brutal as religious wars and no fanatics
>>>as unstoppable as religious nuts. The real motive in all cases is
>>>not about God at all, but to control other people's behavior.
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>"I agree"
>>
>>TSBlue
>>tsblue@longleaf.com
or where you suggest that Jesus was born as a result of illicit sex
between Mary and Joseph (or someone else).
>>Re: How Can a Virgin Possibly Become Pregnant?
>>
>>It is my understanding that our translated "virgin" stems from the
>>hebrew tradition of a young couple living together for a time before
>>wedlock! I would suggest a post to an alt.religion.* group to confirm
>>this.
>>
>>The Virgin Mary may be interpreted different ways.
>>
>>TSBlue
These references are admittedly one sided but so are your posts RE: Eagle
Point.
_____________________________________________________
mmychalk@acs.ryerson.ca (Mike Mychalkiw)
Problems with dongle,AutoCAD R13c4,Novell 4.1 server,Win95
I have contacted my local Autodesk support representative who has even
come on site. The rep has called Autodesk and still nothing works.
______________________________________
"Josep Maria Solanes i Sans"
Problems with AutoCAD 13
In AutoCAD 13c4 and with the following configuration of hardware:
Pentium 166
64 Mb RAM
2 Gb HDD
ATI Pro Upsets 4 Mb of DRAM
the following error is provoked upon concluding of transferring a file to
plotter:
Fatal Error TNT.10049: Out of stack buffers, CS: EIP are in error values:
Err values= 0000000Fh 009D2FD6h
______________________________________
Waldemar A. Santos
Re: Problems printing and plotting with autocad r12 any release and wfw
3.11
Does anyone from autodesk know what is happening? I really need help on
this one, as our vendor support people here in Brazil don't have a clue.
______________________________________
Edward Toung
AutoCAD R13C4 File Opening Problems
I'm running Win95 with newly installed AutoCAD R13c4 on a pentium 100Mhz
with 16MB of RAM. When I try to open an existing DWG file, the entire
program bombs out......it quits entirely. Does anyone has a clue about
this???
______________________________________
S. R. Sheffield (stevers@ac.net)
AutoCAD R13C4 File Opening Problems
There was a warning about the c4 upgrade about purged dimention styles
that would cause a crash... are your old dwg purged? If so, check the
specs with the c4 upgrade.
______________________________________
Iliyan Dobrev
Networking problems under AutoCad
I found myself in a nightmare of the networking drivers - I can not
execute my Dos based AutoCad under Windows, and I can not have my hard
drives shared and my mail running under Dos when I am running the
Autocad.
I think I have tried everything ( I even have used the networking gurus
), but they could'not help me.
______________________________________
<101663.542@compuserve.com>
AutoCAD R13 for Windows - display & file format problems
Any experiences and solutions on problem about being unable to load
drawing that was succesfully saved. Sometimes it is possible to recover
and still impossible to load afterwards! This happens mostly with complex
drawings???
______________________________________
Robert Dean Abelson
HELP.. I've got Install Problems with AutoCAD Designer
I can't seem to get Designer to be recognized by Autocad. I'm running a
Windows 95 platform, and though I can get the menus of Designer to appear
in ACAD13 , I can't even get to the point where the program (Designer)
asks for my authorization code. When I spoke to Autodesk, they referred
me to their $3/min "help" line which I feel is rediculous considering it
is their instructions which I feel to be at fault.
______________________________________
hartpac@pacificrim.net (J.P.Hart)
AutoCAD and Win95 Problems
I have a Gateway P5-75 w 16 MB of RAM. I loaded up AutoCAD V 11 and after
a lot of work got it to run - sort of. It runs way too slowly. It takes
a couple of minutes just to draw a line. I think it doesn't recognize
the extended memory.
Thomas,
As you can see, what has been reputed to be the greatest CAD package in
the world has some significant problems. Concentrating upon the problems
does no justice to the worth of the product. I'm sure you would not want
to throw out AutoCAD because you can't figure out how it is supposed to
be used.
Likewise,
It would do no justice to you to focus upon your agreeing with an atheist
is his attack upon Christians and other religious people.
>>Re: Utter Futility of Arguing With Creationists
>>
>>>On Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:28:32, William R. Penrose wrote:
>>>There are no wars as brutal as religious wars and no fanatics
>>>as unstoppable as religious nuts. The real motive in all cases is
>>>not about God at all, but to control other people's behavior.
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>"I agree"
>>
>>TSBlue
>>tsblue@longleaf.com
or where you suggest that Jesus was born as a result of illicit sex
between Mary and Joseph (or someone else).
>>Re: How Can a Virgin Possibly Become Pregnant?
>>
>>It is my understanding that our translated "virgin" stems from the
>>hebrew tradition of a young couple living together for a time before
>>wedlock! I would suggest a post to an alt.religion.* group to confirm
>>this.
>>
>>The Virgin Mary may be interpreted different ways.
>>
>>TSBlue
These references are admittedly one sided but so are your posts RE: Eagle
Point.
--
Henry C. Francis
Southern Pines, North Carolina
FAX (910) 692-4795
http://www.webbuild.com/~coopfra/
Subject: Re: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinion anyone?
From: ez050640@boris.ucdavis.edu (Theodore Swift)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 01:06:36 GMT
In article <3236561B.37C5@cerfnet.com>, oksi@cerfnet.com wrote:
> THE RATIONALE IS AS FOLLOWS:
>
>
> 1) The peer-review process of scientific journals may take from many
> months to over a year.
>
> 2) The review process is often arbitrary in nature.
I tend to agree with (1) and disagree with (2), and this forms the basis
for my support of the idea of "publishing" electronically, with a few
reservations or amendments to the ideas already presented.
It seems to me the advantage of the electronic medium is speed, and that's
about the only important advantage. But speed can also be a disadvantage:
We want to produce a body of literature that the community of researchers
can rely on for accuracy, logic, etc., and "speed" isn't the best means to
that end.
That being said, I think an electronic "publication" medium provides a
route for rapid feedback on a *draft* of a paper. It occurs to me that
this might blur the definition of "authorship", or at least swell the space
devoted to acknowledgements traditionally found in a paper (e.g. "The authors
wish to thank the 257 reviewers who commented on the text. A full list
can be found at /foo.edu/bar/brickbats" ). Then, after a preliminary round
of feedback, the revised (and, one hopes, improved) paper should go on to
the "traditional" journal revision process, which might be made to respond
faster with the knowledge that the submission has already been run through
a mill.
-Ted Swift