Ok, so it seems HTML and ASCII are the winners.

Nevertheless I think the so-called committee should be platform-aware 
and provide optimal formats for each platform.  And moreover, other 
formats should be available, particularly PostScipt or DVI, to account
for the printed version.  The former can be easily generated out of the 
latter, and there are free viewers available on the net for both, which
means ability to read them in electronic form.

I think DVI may be the only format truly portable, besides pure ASCII.

> I am a stickler for typography and layout.  I really like Microsoft
> Word.  I see the electronic form of the manual as important, but what
> it looks like on paper is the most important thing for me.  Of course
> it should look that way on screen too.

No better thing than TeX/LaTeX and their DVI output.  True typographical
rigour.  Word is messy in text/line weight and equilibrium.  And TTF's 
are very much too liberal.

Best!
-- 
  __|__
___\_/___
   ___      Paulo Mouat,
  |___|  mouat@mail.telepac.pt
  |___|