The Experts below are selected from a list of 255 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Brian W. Kernighan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
revisiting a summer vacation digital restoration and typesetter forensics
Document Engineering, 2013Co-Authors: Steven R Bagley, David F Brailsford, Brian W. KernighanAbstract:In 1979 the Computing Science Research Center ('Center 127') at Bell Laboratories bought a Linotron 202 typesetter from the Mergenthaler company. This was a 'third generation' digital machine that used a CRT to image characters onto photographic paper. The intent was to use existing Linotype fonts and also to develop new ones to exploit the 202's line-drawing capabilities. Use of the 202 was hindered by Mergenthaler's refusal to reveal the inner structure and encoding mechanisms of the font files. The particular 202 was further dogged by extreme hardware and software unreliability. A Memorandum describing the experience was written in early 1980 but was deemed to be too "sensitive" to release. The original troff input for the Memorandum exists and now, more than 30 years later, the Memorandum can be released. However, the only available record of its visual appearance was a poor-quality scanned photocopy of the original printed version. This paper details our efforts in rebuilding a faithful retypeset replica of the original Memorandum, given that the Linotron 202 disappeared long ago, and that this episode at Bell Labs occurred 5 years before the dawn of PostScript (and later PDF) as de facto standards for digital document preservation. The paper concludes with some lessons for digital archiving policy drawn from this rebuilding exercise.
-
ACM Symposium on Document Engineering - Revisiting a summer vacation: digital restoration and typesetter forensics
Proceedings of the 2013 ACM symposium on Document engineering, 2013Co-Authors: Steven R Bagley, David F Brailsford, Brian W. KernighanAbstract:In 1979 the Computing Science Research Center ('Center 127') at Bell Laboratories bought a Linotron 202 typesetter from the Mergenthaler company. This was a 'third generation' digital machine that used a CRT to image characters onto photographic paper. The intent was to use existing Linotype fonts and also to develop new ones to exploit the 202's line-drawing capabilities. Use of the 202 was hindered by Mergenthaler's refusal to reveal the inner structure and encoding mechanisms of the font files. The particular 202 was further dogged by extreme hardware and software unreliability. A Memorandum describing the experience was written in early 1980 but was deemed to be too "sensitive" to release. The original troff input for the Memorandum exists and now, more than 30 years later, the Memorandum can be released. However, the only available record of its visual appearance was a poor-quality scanned photocopy of the original printed version. This paper details our efforts in rebuilding a faithful retypeset replica of the original Memorandum, given that the Linotron 202 disappeared long ago, and that this episode at Bell Labs occurred 5 years before the dawn of PostScript (and later PDF) as de facto standards for digital document preservation. The paper concludes with some lessons for digital archiving policy drawn from this rebuilding exercise.
Steven R Bagley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
revisiting a summer vacation digital restoration and typesetter forensics
Document Engineering, 2013Co-Authors: Steven R Bagley, David F Brailsford, Brian W. KernighanAbstract:In 1979 the Computing Science Research Center ('Center 127') at Bell Laboratories bought a Linotron 202 typesetter from the Mergenthaler company. This was a 'third generation' digital machine that used a CRT to image characters onto photographic paper. The intent was to use existing Linotype fonts and also to develop new ones to exploit the 202's line-drawing capabilities. Use of the 202 was hindered by Mergenthaler's refusal to reveal the inner structure and encoding mechanisms of the font files. The particular 202 was further dogged by extreme hardware and software unreliability. A Memorandum describing the experience was written in early 1980 but was deemed to be too "sensitive" to release. The original troff input for the Memorandum exists and now, more than 30 years later, the Memorandum can be released. However, the only available record of its visual appearance was a poor-quality scanned photocopy of the original printed version. This paper details our efforts in rebuilding a faithful retypeset replica of the original Memorandum, given that the Linotron 202 disappeared long ago, and that this episode at Bell Labs occurred 5 years before the dawn of PostScript (and later PDF) as de facto standards for digital document preservation. The paper concludes with some lessons for digital archiving policy drawn from this rebuilding exercise.
-
ACM Symposium on Document Engineering - Revisiting a summer vacation: digital restoration and typesetter forensics
Proceedings of the 2013 ACM symposium on Document engineering, 2013Co-Authors: Steven R Bagley, David F Brailsford, Brian W. KernighanAbstract:In 1979 the Computing Science Research Center ('Center 127') at Bell Laboratories bought a Linotron 202 typesetter from the Mergenthaler company. This was a 'third generation' digital machine that used a CRT to image characters onto photographic paper. The intent was to use existing Linotype fonts and also to develop new ones to exploit the 202's line-drawing capabilities. Use of the 202 was hindered by Mergenthaler's refusal to reveal the inner structure and encoding mechanisms of the font files. The particular 202 was further dogged by extreme hardware and software unreliability. A Memorandum describing the experience was written in early 1980 but was deemed to be too "sensitive" to release. The original troff input for the Memorandum exists and now, more than 30 years later, the Memorandum can be released. However, the only available record of its visual appearance was a poor-quality scanned photocopy of the original printed version. This paper details our efforts in rebuilding a faithful retypeset replica of the original Memorandum, given that the Linotron 202 disappeared long ago, and that this episode at Bell Labs occurred 5 years before the dawn of PostScript (and later PDF) as de facto standards for digital document preservation. The paper concludes with some lessons for digital archiving policy drawn from this rebuilding exercise.
David F Brailsford - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
revisiting a summer vacation digital restoration and typesetter forensics
Document Engineering, 2013Co-Authors: Steven R Bagley, David F Brailsford, Brian W. KernighanAbstract:In 1979 the Computing Science Research Center ('Center 127') at Bell Laboratories bought a Linotron 202 typesetter from the Mergenthaler company. This was a 'third generation' digital machine that used a CRT to image characters onto photographic paper. The intent was to use existing Linotype fonts and also to develop new ones to exploit the 202's line-drawing capabilities. Use of the 202 was hindered by Mergenthaler's refusal to reveal the inner structure and encoding mechanisms of the font files. The particular 202 was further dogged by extreme hardware and software unreliability. A Memorandum describing the experience was written in early 1980 but was deemed to be too "sensitive" to release. The original troff input for the Memorandum exists and now, more than 30 years later, the Memorandum can be released. However, the only available record of its visual appearance was a poor-quality scanned photocopy of the original printed version. This paper details our efforts in rebuilding a faithful retypeset replica of the original Memorandum, given that the Linotron 202 disappeared long ago, and that this episode at Bell Labs occurred 5 years before the dawn of PostScript (and later PDF) as de facto standards for digital document preservation. The paper concludes with some lessons for digital archiving policy drawn from this rebuilding exercise.
-
ACM Symposium on Document Engineering - Revisiting a summer vacation: digital restoration and typesetter forensics
Proceedings of the 2013 ACM symposium on Document engineering, 2013Co-Authors: Steven R Bagley, David F Brailsford, Brian W. KernighanAbstract:In 1979 the Computing Science Research Center ('Center 127') at Bell Laboratories bought a Linotron 202 typesetter from the Mergenthaler company. This was a 'third generation' digital machine that used a CRT to image characters onto photographic paper. The intent was to use existing Linotype fonts and also to develop new ones to exploit the 202's line-drawing capabilities. Use of the 202 was hindered by Mergenthaler's refusal to reveal the inner structure and encoding mechanisms of the font files. The particular 202 was further dogged by extreme hardware and software unreliability. A Memorandum describing the experience was written in early 1980 but was deemed to be too "sensitive" to release. The original troff input for the Memorandum exists and now, more than 30 years later, the Memorandum can be released. However, the only available record of its visual appearance was a poor-quality scanned photocopy of the original printed version. This paper details our efforts in rebuilding a faithful retypeset replica of the original Memorandum, given that the Linotron 202 disappeared long ago, and that this episode at Bell Labs occurred 5 years before the dawn of PostScript (and later PDF) as de facto standards for digital document preservation. The paper concludes with some lessons for digital archiving policy drawn from this rebuilding exercise.
David S. Yost - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Budapest Memorandum and Russia's intervention in Ukraine
International Affairs, 2015Co-Authors: David S. YostAbstract:Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States extended security assurances to Ukraine in December 1994 in an agreement that became known as the Budapest Memorandum. This agreement was part of a package of arrangements whereby Ukraine transferred the Soviet-made nuclear weapons on its territory to Russia and acceded to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a non-nuclear weapon state (NNWS). Russia's violations of the Budapest Memorandum, notably its annexation of Crimea, could have far-reaching implications for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament because of the questions that Russia's behaviour has raised about the reliability of major-power security assurances for NNWS parties to the NPT. Doubts about the reliability of such assurances could create incentives to initiate, retain or accelerate national nuclear weapons programs. Moreover, because the Budapest Memorandum included restatements of UN Charter provisions and principles articulated in the Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, Russia's disregard for the Budapest Memorandum has raised fundamental questions about the future of international order. The Russians have demonstrated that, despite economic sanctions and international condemnation, they are prepared to disregard longstanding legal and political norms, including those expressed in the Budapest Memorandum, in pursuit of strategic and economic advantages and the fulfilment of national identity goals. Unless Russia reverses its dangerous course, the fate of the Budapest Memorandum may in retrospect stand out as a landmark in the breakdown of international order.
Matthias Schrappe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Memorandum III: Methoden für die Versorgungsforschung (Teil 2)
Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2010Co-Authors: Edmund Neugebauer, Andrea Icks, Matthias SchrappeAbstract:Die methodische Qualitat von Versorgungsforschungsstudien wird haufig kritisiert. Einheitliche Standards auf dem Gebiet der Versorgungsforschung fehlen bisher. Das Deutsche Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung e. V. (DNVF e. V.) sah sich deshalb aufgefordert, hier eine Hilfestellung zu geben und hat auf Beschluss der Mitgliederversammlung der im DNVF e. V. organisierten Fachgesellschaften, damit begonnen ein Memorandum III „Methoden fur die Versorgungsforschung” zu erarbeiten. Der inzwischen erschienene Teil 1 des Memorandums III befasste sich mit den methodischen Grundprinzipien und Mindeststandards in 3 Themenbereichen „Epidemiologische Methoden fur die Versorgungsforschung”, „Methoden fur die organisationsbezogene Versorgungsforschung” und „Methoden fur die Lebensqualitatsforschung”. Der hier vorgelegte Teil 2 erweitert das Spektrum um „Methoden der gesundheitsokonomischen Evaluation” und „Register fur die Versorgungsforschung”. Dieser wurde am 30.08.2010 von den genannten Mitgliedsgesellschaften im DNVF verabschiedet. 2 vertiefende Publikationen zu den genannten Bereichen werden in Folgepublikationen dieser Zeitschrift veroffentlicht. Auch der 2. Teil des Memorandums III wendet sich sowohl an die Versorgungsforscher, die Studien planen, durchfuhren und veroffentlichen, als auch an Gutachter, die Antrage und Publikationen zu Versorgungsforschungsstudien bewerten. Entsprechend dem Erkenntnisfortschritt in der Versorgungsforschung ist vorgesehen, beide Teile des Memorandums III in sinnvollen Zeitabschnitten zu aktualisieren und um weitere Teile aus dem vielfaltigen Spektrum an Methoden mit hoher Relevanz fur die Versorgungsforschung zu erganzen. Das Memorandum ist daher als „Work in Progress” anzusehen. The methodical quality of health services research studies is often subject to criticism. Common standards in the field of health services research have been lacking so far. Hence, the German Network for Health Services Research [Deutsches Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung e. V. (DNVF e. V.)] decided to contribute to an improvement of this situation. The DNVF e. V. has already published part 1 of the Memorandum III“Methods for Health Services Research” for the 3 subject areas “Epidemiological Methods for Health Services Research”, “Methods for Organisational Health Services Research” and “Methods for Quality of Life Research”. The herewith published Part 2 of the Memorandum extends the spectrum by describing the methodological principles and minimum standards of “Methods of Health Economic Evaluations” and “Registries for Health Services Research”. On 30th August 2010, the member societies, mentioned as authors, approved this second part of the Memorandum III. 2 in-depth publications focussing on the 2 mentioned topics will be published in the next issues of this journal. This Memorandum is intended for health services researchers who are planning, conducting and publishing studies as well as for reviewers who evaluate research proposals and publications on health services research studies. In accord with the expected advances in knowledge in health services research, it is planned to update the 2 parts of Memorandum III at appropriate intervals and to publish further parts from the huge spectrum of methods relevant to this field in the near future. Thus, the Memorandum has to be considered as work in progress.
-
Memorandum III: "Methods for Health Services Research" (Part 1)
Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2009Co-Authors: Holger Pfaff, Matthias Schrappe, Gerd Glaeske, E. A. M. Neugebauer, Zentrum Für Versorgungsforschung Köln Der Uniklinik Köln, Herdecke, Klinikum Der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-universität Frankfurt AAbstract:The methodical quality of health services research studies is often subject to criticism. Common standards in the field of health services research have been lacking so far. Hence, the German Network Health Services Research [Deutsches Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung e.V. (DNVF e.V.)] decided to contribute to improve this situation. On 1 July 2009, the DNVF e.V. approved the Memorandum III "Methods for Health Services Research", supported by the member societies mentioned as authors. For the three subject areas "Epidemiological Methods for Health Services Research", "Methods for Organisational Health Services Research" and "Methods for Quality of Life Research", this Memorandum describes the methodological principles and minimum standards which should be adhered to when conducting and publishing health services research studies. Three in-depth publications focussing on the three mentioned topics will be published in the next issues of this journal. This Memorandum is intended for health services researchers who are planning, conducting and publishing studies as well as for reviewers who evaluate research proposals and publications on health services research studies. In accord with the expected advances in knowledge in health services research, it is planned to update the Memorandum III (part 1) at appropriate intervals and to publish part 2 in the near future. Thus, the Memorandum has to be considered as work in progress.
