From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed May 14 01:56:34 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA26233
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 01:56:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA26224
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 14 May 1997 01:56:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id BAA14275; Wed, 14 May 1997 01:56:48 -0700 (PDT)
To: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
cc: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Is Thot (WYSIWIG editor) for you? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 14 May 1997 01:05:50 PDT."
             <199705140805.BAA03496@rah.star-gate.com> 
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 01:56:48 -0700
Message-ID: <14271.863600208@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> What I am pitching is for is that if Thot is good we can start advertising it
> and hopefully standardize our internal documentation based on its format.
> Internal documentation meaning things like : reports, articles, etc...

But we already have such a standard and it's called SGML.  There would
have to be some pretty significant advantages to Thot in order to replace
our current doc system and, frankly, I just don't see it happening.  Too
much work has gone into the existing framework, for one thing.

					Jordan