Re: i vs em and b vs strong
At 22:16 -0700 on 11/07/2010, LuKreme wrote about Re: i vs em and b vs strong: On 7-Nov-2010, at 11:31, Linda wrote: How do I prevent Tidy in BBEdit when I reflow a document from changing all of my i tags to em and all of my b tags to strong? You don't. i and b should not be used. That depends. If the intent is to have the file shorter (due to the tags being shorter) then using i/b as opposed to em/strong is indicated. OTOH: If the reason is to control the display of the tagged text, then you get into the issue of em/strong displaying however the browser feels like it wants to support these tags which may not be as if they were i/b tags. If you use em/strong in lieu of i/b then the only way to insure display as italic/bold is to use CSS to hit the browser over the head with a 2x4 by defining i/b as italic/bold in lieu of the Browser's default display choice. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
I am not going to argue about it. It was just a question. Just how much HTML code are you writing? Hopefully a whole library of books. It sounds like a Text Factory might be useful to you Thanks. I am using the demo version of BBEdit right now. I think that it is a lot more powerful than I realized. It really doesn't suck does it? Looks like I will be a new customer very soon. If you just want to reformat your code for readability, the commands under Markup - Utilities - Format might work for you. Thanks. I will look into that as well. BBEdit looks like it is an amazing app. Linda -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:16 AM, LuKreme krem...@kreme.com wrote: i and b should not be used. Right. Unless you need text that is italic or bold. user hat=typographer pedant I sometimes need to display type that is in italics, for the sake of being italic, and not because it contains any particular attribute other than its italicness. Same with bold. For example, I'm attempting to represent a textual poem that includes various words in bold, but are bold for no discernable reason based on semantic meaning. In this case, the only options are span with styles, or b. Otherwise, you're leaving yourself open to the interpretation of the browser developers, who decide what em and strong should mean. And really, the fact that it's bold or italic may be meaningful, in the context of the poem. (I've pined for an oblique element in HTML, as well, but I guess this is what XML/XSLT is for.) Typography variations such as italics are often used in manuscripts (and closed captions) to demonstrate that a sound is quiet, or whispered. You certainly wouldn't use em in that situation -- more appropriately, perhaps, span class=whisper. (But that's also seven times longer than i which, if you don't care about semantics, could be relevant.) /user I worry sometimes that we're just using em to mean italic, swinging the pendulum in the opposite direction. (I've seen code where folks are using em to style titles of books in bibliographies. But in general, you're right. If you've got text that should be semantically bold or italic because of strength or emphasis, b and i are wrong. I should worry less. --Kerri -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
On 7 Nov 2010, at 11:16 PM, LuKreme wrote: You don't. i and b should not be used. This is the case when the intended semantics of the markup is that emphasis and strong emphasis are to be indicated, and you don't care how the renderer accomplishes it. Sometimes, however, the intended semantics are that the text be rendered as the author intends. In legal citation, the name of the case MUST BE IN ITALICS. When you say Brown v. Board of Education, you don't mean to say it emphatically, you mean to set it in italics. i and em mean different things, and treating them as though em is just the New! Improved! Modern! i is naïve and wrong. I won't get into whether you should just punt it to span classes. Markup should work even in a CSS world. — F -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
On Nov 08, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Fritz Anderson fri...@manoverboard.org wrote: On 7 Nov 2010, at 11:16 PM, LuKreme wrote: You don't. i and b should not be used. This is the case when the intended semantics of the markup is that emphasis and strong emphasis are to be indicated, and you don't care how the renderer accomplishes it. Sometimes, however, the intended semantics are that the text be rendered as the author intends. In legal citation, the name of the case MUST BE IN ITALICS. When you say Brown v. Board of Education, you don't mean to say it emphatically, you mean to set it in italics. i and em mean different things, and treating them as though em is just the New! Improved! Modern! i is naïve and wrong. Alas, this is a terrible example for your case - because there is a specific semantic tag for citations, CITE, which should be used for such things. Among other things, it makes it much easier for things like screen readers and indexing tools to parse the document properly. I had an argument with a friend of mine who does a lot of e-book work about this, just a few days ago. I'm a strong supporter of semantic markup whenever possible, for precisely this reason - formatting markup should be based on semantic meaning whenever possible, so that the underlining meaning can be directly accessed by software tools. However, I also had to acknowledge my friend's point that there are so many semantic uses for boldface/italic that they realistically can't be covered by pure semantic markup - ship names, interior thoughts/monologue, etc. etc. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
If you have an at-all-common case for the content of your site
requiring a specific presentation, this is very simply accomplished
with a new span class. USS Enterprise, defining span.shipname in your
CSS as font-style: Italic;
On an author's site, for instance, it might be common convention for
internal monologues - the thoughts of characters - to be rendered in
italics. So create a new span class for 'thought'. And so forth.
Whenever the writer has an intention for XYZ bit of content to be
rendered in a certain way, there is a reason, an identifiable and
underlying definition to the content within the context. Try to
respect that however possible. There are good reasons why this is
important, why lots of really big brains have spent a lot of thought
on things like this. Those of us who 'preach' adherence to those
guidelines do so because we respect their reasons.
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
On Mon 10/11/08 12:13 , Travis Butler wrote:
On Nov 08, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Fritz Anderson wrote:
On 7 Nov 2010, at 11:16 PM, LuKreme wrote:
You don't. and should not be used.
This is the case when the intended semantics of the markup is that
emphasis and strong emphasis are to be indicated, and you don't care
how the renderer accomplishes it. Sometimes, however, the intended
semantics are that the text be rendered as the author intends. In
legal citation, the name of the case MUST BE IN ITALICS. When you say
Brown v. Board of Education, you don't mean to say it emphatically,
you mean to set it in italics. and mean different things, and
treating them as though is just the New! Improved! Modern! is naïve
and wrong.
Alas, this is a terrible example for your case - because there is a
specific semantic tag for citations, , which should be used for such
things. Among other things, it makes it much easier for things like
screen readers and indexing tools to parse the document properly.
I had an argument with a friend of mine who does a lot of e-book
work about this, just a few days ago. I'm a strong supporter of
semantic markup whenever possible, for precisely this reason -
formatting markup should be based on semantic meaning whenever
possible, so that the underlining meaning can be directly accessed by
software tools. However, I also had to acknowledge my friend's point
that there are so many semantic uses for boldface/italic that they
realistically can't be covered by pure semantic markup - ship names,
interior thoughts/monologue, etc. etc.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups.
To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem,
please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the
group.
Follow @bbedit on Twitter:
Links:
--
[1] http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en
[2] http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups.
To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en
If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem,
please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group.
Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
At 13:06 -0500 on 11/08/2010, go...@fred.net wrote about Re: i vs em and b vs strong: If you have an at-all-common case for the content of your site requiring a specific presentation, this is very simply accomplished with a new span class. span class=shipnameUSS Enterprise/span, defining span.shipname in your CSS as font-style: Italic; On an author's site, for instance, it might be common convention for internal monologues - the thoughts of characters - to be rendered in italics. So create a new span class for 'thought'. And so forth. Whenever the writer has an intention for XYZ bit of content to be rendered in a certain way, there is a reason, an identifiable and underlying definition to the content within the context. Try to respect that however possible. There are good reasons why this is important, why lots of really big brains have spent a lot of thought on things like this. Those of us who 'preach' adherence to those guidelines do so because we respect their reasons. While it is all well and good to go to this extent to bow-down to the Ivory-Tower Mucky-Mucks, it can lead to ridiculous markup. Having to add span tags (at 20-30 characters per tag) just to give a ship name in the middle of a sentence and having another span (or class on the p) for thoughts and another for some other purpose instead of just using the i/b/u tags to document how you want the enclosed text to be displayed instead of what the text represents (with the CSS controlling how it is to be displayed) leads to major bloat compared to just using the correct tag for the presentational display. So long as you do not need to be able to parse out Ship Names and Thoughts then using the presentational tags (and CCS to edit how they are displayed) is IMO good enough. When I need to be able to change the display at moment's notice (and need to control different types of context) then the bloated markup may have some purpose. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
In general, this is a polite forum and whoever you are referring to as Mucky-Mucks would probably tell you, I hope in more polite and respectful way, that among the many reasons for well-designed code is portability across different rendering engines. The notion of using classes and not embedding style elements in code is not an academic bloviation but sensible code structure. How can it more bloated to write span class = BB than i - both require closing tags and the former forces the rendering device to obey your design. You are free of course, to have your opinion and write your code however you wish, but rude language does not help you make your case. On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg rar...@banet.netwrote: At 13:06 -0500 on 11/08/2010, go...@fred.net wrote about Re: i vs em and b vs strong: If you have an at-all-common case for the content of your site requiring a specific presentation, this is very simply accomplished with a new span class. span class=shipnameUSS Enterprise/span, defining span.shipname in your CSS as font-style: Italic; On an author's site, for instance, it might be common convention for internal monologues - the thoughts of characters - to be rendered in italics. So create a new span class for 'thought'. And so forth. Whenever the writer has an intention for XYZ bit of content to be rendered in a certain way, there is a reason, an identifiable and underlying definition to the content within the context. Try to respect that however possible. There are good reasons why this is important, why lots of really big brains have spent a lot of thought on things like this. Those of us who 'preach' adherence to those guidelines do so because we respect their reasons. While it is all well and good to go to this extent to bow-down to the Ivory-Tower Mucky-Mucks, it can lead to ridiculous markup. Having to add span tags (at 20-30 characters per tag) just to give a ship name in the middle of a sentence and having another span (or class on the p) for thoughts and another for some other purpose instead of just using the i/b/u tags to document how you want the enclosed text to be displayed instead of what the text represents (with the CSS controlling how it is to be displayed) leads to major bloat compared to just using the correct tag for the presentational display. So long as you do not need to be able to parse out Ship Names and Thoughts then using the presentational tags (and CCS to edit how they are displayed) is IMO good enough. When I need to be able to change the display at moment's notice (and need to control different types of context) then the bloated markup may have some purpose. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.combbedit%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
using the 'tidy' command-line tool (was: Re: i vs em and b vs strong)
At 14:12 -0500 11/07/2010, Morbus Iff wrote: Linda 1anml...@gmail.com asked: How do I prevent Tidy in BBEdit when I reflow a document from changing all of my i tags to em and all of my b tags to strong? Tidy does have this option at the command-line level (logical-emphasis), but I don't think you can tweak BBEdit's implementation of Tidy to support it. What I'd do is create a new Text Factory that runs the Reflow Document command, and then two search and replaces to tweak the tags back to what you want. As Morbus says, BBEdit's built-in Tidy commands are limited to the options presented in their dialogs. However, you can make use of the additional options offered by the command-line 'tidy' tool by applying it as a shell filter. To do this: Create a tidy config file (tidyconfig.txt) containing your desired options, then create a shell filter as follows: #!/bin/sh /usr/bin/tidy -f /dev/null -config /path/to/your/tidyconfig.txt $1 and save it into the Unix Filters folder of BBEdit's app support folder: ~/Library/Application Support/BBEdit/Unix Support/Unix Filters/ You can now apply this filter to the frontmost document on by selecting it from the Unix Filters submenu of the Shebang (#!) menu. [Please note that whatever options you set for 'tidy', you'll need to redirect error output away from stderr, otherwise the combined output will be directed to BBEdit's Unix Script Output window instead of replacing the current document's contents.] Regards, Patrick Woolsey == Bare Bones Software, Inc.http://www.barebones.com P.O. Box 1048, Bedford, MA 01730-1048 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
I was going to stay out of this but foolishly decided to point out that in HTML5 specification, both the b and i tags now have semantic meaning. I quote from the Working Draft regarding the b tag, 'the element has now been given the specific semantic purpose of representing text “offset from its surrounding content without conveying any extra emphasis or importance, and for which the conventional typographic presentation is bold text.' The i tag has a similar semantic meaning. This in turn gives both the em and strong tags a stronger semantic meaning as well since they are specific for text that is to provide voice to the text, emphasis and importance as opposed to a typographical difference. Unfortunately, Tidy itself has fallen behind and last I saw, the developers didn't have plans to support HTML5, rather they hoped someone else would develop it, html5lib being one option. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
How do I prevent Tidy in BBEdit when I reflow a document from changing all of my i tags to em and all of my b tags to strong? Tidy does have this option at the command-line level (logical-emphasis), but I don’t think you can tweak BBEdit’s implementation of Tidy to support it. What I’d do is create a new Text Factory that runs the Reflow Document command, and then two search and replaces to tweak the tags back to what you want. -- Morbus Iff ( drowning in data, bereft of knowledge. ) http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.disobey.com/wiki/ twitter: @morbusiff / skype: morbusiff / irc.freenode.net, Morbus An O'Reilly author and blogger: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
At 10:31 -0800 on 11/07/2010, Linda wrote about i vs em and b vs strong: How do I prevent Tidy in BBEdit when I reflow a document from changing all of my i tags to em and all of my b tags to strong? If you can not find the setting to prevent Tidy from doing this type of fixing/correction you can always just do a find/replace of em to i and strong to b just before you save. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
you can always just do a find/replace of em to i and strong to b just before you save Thanks. That is what I am doing now. I was just trying to save 2 steps since there are hundreds of pages. Linda -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
I was just trying to save 2 steps since there are hundreds of pages. It sounds like a Text Factory might be useful to you. It would allow you to combine all your steps into one, and then run it against hundreds of documents in one fell swoop. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
On Sunday, November 7, 2010, Linda 1anml...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks. That is what I am doing now. I was just trying to save 2 steps since there are hundreds of pages. Taking a step back: what are you trying to accomplish? Tidy Reflow has a pretty specific set of behaviors, which includes rewriting things to suit its standards of correctness. If you don't want that, then Tidy Reflow (or Tidy Clean) is not the way to go. If you just want to reformat your code for readability, the commands under Markup - Utilities - Format might work for you (though I do recommend using one of the 9.6.1 prereleases). On the other hand, if you're counting bytes, then doing something which adds them is probably contraindicated. R. -- Rich Siegel Bare Bones Software, Inc. sie...@barebones.com http://www.barebones.com/ Someday I'll look back on all this and laugh... until they sedate me. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
At 18:23 -0500 on 11/07/2010, Rich Siegel wrote about Re: i vs em and b vs strong: On the other hand, if you're counting bytes, then doing something which adds them is probably contraindicated. I agree. For that you would want to go with COMPACT. You can use Hierarchical ot Tidy before editing and then compact again when you are ready to store your file for transmission. The use of Tidy makes sure the content is correct (it fixes and errors that syntax check would just indicate). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
On 7-Nov-2010, at 11:31, Linda wrote: How do I prevent Tidy in BBEdit when I reflow a document from changing all of my i tags to em and all of my b tags to strong? You don't. i and b should not be used. I know the debate about these tags. However, these pages will be displayed within a native iPhone/iPad app in a UIWebView. I am in control of the documents and they will not be displayed on the web or be used with screen readers. My reason for using the old tags is to save memory. These will be huge eBooks that occupy a lot of memory. You are worried about a couple of bytes? Anywhere that I can save a few tiny amounts of memory on each page will be appreciated by my customers. No one will ever notice that amount of data. The smallest iPhone holds 8 BILLION characters. That is, if you printed it out at an average of 1000 characters per page (maybe a little light, but the math is easy) it's a MILLION pages of text. A case of paper contains 5,000 sheets of paper. So you are talking about 200 cases of paper (2,000 reams). Of course, the largest iPads hold 8 times that. Just how much HTML code are you writing? -- The older you get the more you need the people you knew when you were young. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
Re: i vs em and b vs strong
On 08/11/2010, at 16:16 , LuKreme wrote: You are worried about a couple of bytes? ... The smallest iPhone holds 8 BILLION characters. There is a significant percentage reduction in file size effected when you replace strong and emphasis with b and i, especially in text which is heavily marked up (eg: man pages which contain lots of bold, underline, fixed-width, italics, etc). My Palm V with 2MB of RAM is still operational, even if it only lasts a few minutes before the battery runs dry. Alex -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the BBEdit Talk discussion group on Google Groups. To post to this group, send email to bbedit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bbedit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bbedit?hl=en If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email supp...@barebones.com rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bbedit
