Re: A Real puzzler

[Carl Distefano cld@xxxxxxxx]

Reply to note from Frank Brownlow  Sat, 14 Jul
2007 21:35:05 -0400

> First, thanks for the information re. producing RTF files with
> U2--that kind of information supplies one of the reasons why I
> wanted to know if U2 worked with Signature files.
...
> just as I don't know whether U2 works with Signature, tho' I
> gather it probably doesn't.

"Works with Signature files" and "works with Signature" are two
different questions. If you're asking whether U2 routines that
operate on files will work with files created in Signature, the
answer is yes, because the Signature and Xy4 file formats are the
indistinguishable -- provided that you're running U2 in Xy4. So,
for example, if you took a file created in Signature, CAlled it in
Xy4 and issued SA/RTF, you *will* get an RTF version of the
file.

But if you're asking whether U2 will work with Signature (the
program, as opposed to files created with the program), then the
answer has to be more nuanced. As a threshold matter, U2 is not
fundamentally incompatible with Signature in the way that it is
incompatible with Xy3. The U2 customization file is unknown to Xy3;
if you try to LOAD MY.U2 in Xy3, you'll get a "File doesn't have
load ID" error message, because Xy3 doesn't recognize the U2
customization ID. Signature, on the other hand, does recognize the
U2 file ID, so you will, at a minimum, be able to load the file.
Beyond that, all bets are off. U2 isn't a single program, but a
library of 700+ programs (a/k/a routines or frames), many of which
interact with each other behind the scenes. As I said earlier, some
of these routines were developed in Signature, and should therefore
work in Signature, but many more were developed in Xy4. Some of the
latter may work in Signature, but many very well may not. The only
way to know for sure is to try.

--
Carl Distefano
cld@xxxxxxxx