Search

This article focuses on markup systems and the future of scholarly text processing. Since the introduction of inexpensive and powerful personal computers, technologists have seen a change in focus away from developing such new strategies toward finding ways to do the old things faster. This transition manifests itself in part through a change in models. Probably most important, the transition from centralized computing to distributed computing began in business and industry, which remains the most compelling market for developers. Traditionally, such installations hire secretaries to type documents that are already substantially complete. Even in academia there is reduced impetus for more intelligent systems. Universities have their own business and administrative offices that make good use of business-oriented systems. Moreover, scholars often prefer these systems over the alternatives. Those who have access to more powerful systems rarely have the time to learn to exploit them fully, and many find them too complicated to use at all.

This article focuses on the importance of computers in the U.S. schools and the legislative procedures needed to bring it about. The author has introduced two bills in Congress that would put computers into schools namely the H.R. 701. "The Computer Contribution Act of 1983," and HR. 3098, "Technology Education Assistance and Development Act of 1983." Both the pieces of legislation use the tax code to buy the computers. A computer company receives a tax deduction for donation of computer equipment to schools. The article discusses H.R. 701. The bill amends section 170(e) of the tax code. It provides for a more generous charitable deduction for newly manufactured computers donated by corporations to elementary or secondary schools. The article also informs that the deduction received by the computer-equipment manufactures would be the cost of production plus one half of the manufacturer's normal markup-not to exceed two times the cost of manufacturing the item. The author argues that the taxpayer gets top equipment at a bargain price. And it is equipment that the taxpayer would be buying sooner or later.