Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-21 Thread spereira1952
Here is another scan from a different location: http://www.imsai.net/download/IEEE_696_1983.pdf I hope this may help. smp - Original Message -

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Chuck Guzis
On 12/20/2015 04:02 AM, Tor Arntsen wrote: On 20 December 2015 at 07:25, Eric Smith wrote: Is this it? (1983) http://www.pestingers.net/PDFs/Other_computers/IEEE%20696%20S-100%20Bus%20Specs.pdf That's the one that's been screwed up by OCR. What about this one?

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Eric Smith
Has same OCR problems. See figure 16 on page 38.

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Eric Smith
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > There's another one here also, but I assume it's also an OCR victim: > http://www.z80.eu/dos65/DOS-65_IEEE_Standard_696_Guide.pdf That's interesting, and thanks for pointing it out, but it isn't the standard.

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Tor Arntsen
On 20 December 2015 at 07:25, Eric Smith wrote: >> Is this it? (1983) >> http://www.pestingers.net/PDFs/Other_computers/IEEE%20696%20S-100%20Bus%20Specs.pdf > > That's the one that's been screwed up by OCR. What about this one? Except for the front page and possibly the very

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Eric Smith
I asked: > Does anyone have a scan of the IEEE-696 (S-100) standard that has NOT > been run through OCR The problem has been solved. Thanks!

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Dale H. Cook
At 03:04 PM 12/20/2015, Eric Smith wrote: >The problem has been solved. Is the solution available online? Dale H. Cook, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA Osborne 1 / Kaypro 4-84 / Kaypro 1 / Amstrad PPC-640 http://plymouthcolony.net/starcity/radios/index.html

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Chuck Guzis
On 12/20/2015 11:13 AM, Eric Smith wrote: On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote: There's another one here also, but I assume it's also an OCR victim: http://www.z80.eu/dos65/DOS-65_IEEE_Standard_696_Guide.pdf That's interesting, and thanks for pointing it out,

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Eric Smith
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > Does IEEE consider this to be copyrighted material? Of course they do. > Have you contacted the folks at IEEE for a copy? It's withdrawn, so IEEE doesn't sell it. Most likely IHS Global Engineering Documents does. Not

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Mouse
> If so, 1983+95 = 2078 when it'll be public domain, Jurisdiction-dependent. Not everywhere is crazy enough to follow the USA's disney clause (though the Berne Convention does have some possibly-relevant reciprocal recognition clauses). What little I've been able to find on this in a few

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-20 Thread Eric Smith
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mouse wrote: > What little I've been able to find on this in a few minutes indicates > that "author's lifetime + 70" is more common than anything + 95. In some (many?) jurisdictions that use author's lifetime + 70, for works of

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-19 Thread Eric Smith
> Is this it? (1983) > http://www.pestingers.net/PDFs/Other_computers/IEEE%20696%20S-100%20Bus%20Specs.pdf That's the one that's been screwed up by OCR.

Re: scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-19 Thread Chuck Guzis
On 12/19/2015 07:57 PM, Eric Smith wrote: Does anyone have a scan of the IEEE-696 (S-100) standard that has NOT been run through OCR to screw up the typography (and even some of the illustrations)? I'm *not* looking for the draft, only the final standard. Is this it? (1983)

scan of IEEE-696 standard

2015-12-19 Thread Eric Smith
Does anyone have a scan of the IEEE-696 (S-100) standard that has NOT been run through OCR to screw up the typography (and even some of the illustrations)? I'm *not* looking for the draft, only the final standard.