12 Jan
2016
12 Jan
'16
6:10 p.m.
[2016-01-12 21:39] Warren Toomey <wkt(a)tuhs.org>
Double argh.
Oh well, I have to utter the same sound!
The missing page 43 in the other file it only ads. I already guessed,
that full-page ads were omitted, but my misunderstanding was a different
thing: The designers of this journal didn't follow nowadays typographic
rules! In UNIX Review, content in boxes is *not* auxiliary stuff but
*real* content!
The beginning of the mentioned article is not missing but can be found
in the big box in the lower half of page 42! It just never crossed my
mind that what looked like an ad could actually be the most important
part of an article -- the title and introduction -- when the rest of
it looked completely different.
What a great example for the need for coherent and common typography!
I had scanned that issue in, and I've just put it
up in the archive at
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Unix_Review/unixreview_1985jan.pdf
Thanks a lot for the (much better) scan and the link to the web
page as well.
meillo