10.0783 C programming? anything since Coombs &al.?

WILLARD MCCARTY (willard.mccarty@kcl.ac.uk)
Mon, 17 Mar 1997 07:38:45 +0000 (GMT)

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 10, No. 783.
Center for Electronic Texts in the Humanities (Princeton/Rutgers)
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
Information at http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/

[1] From: Anita Jawary <anitaj@cs.monash.edu.au> (25)
Subject: Re: 10.0781 Scientific American article

[2] From: Leo Robert Klein <kleinl@is2.nyu.edu> (17)
Subject: Ten Years Since Coombs, Renear & DeRose

--[1]----------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 11:31:23 +1100
From: Anita Jawary <anitaj@cs.monash.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 10.0781 Scientific American article

[the following included as part of a longer note --WM]

I teach communication skills in the Dpt of Computer Science at Monash
University and have been asked to teach first year students internal
documentation. My background is in journalism.

To begin with, I believe I will have to teach myself C programming. This,
for me, seems a mammoth task. Do you know of any good 'do-it-yourself'
books?

Further, do you know of any good books on the teaching of internal
documentation?

Regards,
Anita Jawary

============
Anita Jawary
Department of Computer Science
Monash University
Wellington Road,
Clayton 3168,
Victoria,
Australia.

anitaj@cs.monash.edu.au
ph:(03) 9905-5210
Fax:(03) 9905-5146
URL:http://www.cs.monash.edu.au/~anitaj/

--[2]----------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 04:18:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Leo Robert Klein <kleinl@is2.nyu.edu>
Subject: Ten Years Since Coombs, Renear & DeRose

While writing a paper for class, it struck me that the article on "Markup
Systems and the Future of Scholarly Text Precessing" which appeared in the
Nov. 1987 issue of Communications of the ACM is almost ten years old.

It's probably one of the best sales jobs on "descriptive" markup I've ever
read though I think its criticism of "procedural" markup and the attention
paid to fonts, etc., a bit too harsh and somewhat old school. I also
don't think its claim that "descriptive" markup is actually easier than
"procedural" markup has been borne out--at least up to now.

Does anyone have any speculations on this or on the article in general?
It's certainly worth the reading.

LEO

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leo Robert Klein 70 Washington Square South
Reference Associate New York, NY. 10012
General & Humanities Reference Tel.: (212) 998-2500
Elmer Holmes Bobst Library Fax: (212) 995-4383
New York University Email: kleinl@is2.nyu.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------