On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Using ` and ' as quotation marks is a long-standing Internet convention.
[...]
Not a reply to your message really, but on this topic, I really recommend
the following page. It's really well-researched:
Stefan Persson wrote:
Why doesn't that page follow the ASCII standard and/or
any ASCII-based
standard?
What? As far as I can tell, it's 100% ASCII.
It doesn't follow the ASCII standard as far as quotation marks are
concerned.
Using ` and ' as quotation marks is a long-standing
, 2002 08:26
Subject: Re: Header Reply-To
At 07:21 -0800 2002-11-04, Mark Davis wrote:
I don't think that usage is described in the ASCII standard; as far as I
can
tell it is only in that RFC.
I was *caused* by the ASCII standard surely.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http
” ◄
- Original Message -
From: David Starner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 21:02
Subject: Re: Header Reply-To
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 02:08:45AM +0100, Stefan Persson wrote:
It doesn't follow the ASCII standard as far as quotation marks are
concerned
Mark Davis mark dot davis at jtcsv dot com wrote:
First, the ` is not a quote mark: it is a grave accent/ Second, it
also doesn/t say that you can/t use a slash/ say/ instead of a comma/
apostrophe/ or period/ But that doesn/t mean it/s a good idea/
It's a terrible idea. I hate ``this
Thomas Lotze asked:
is there a reason mails from the Unicode list don't have a
Reply-To header pointing to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
Yes.
This point has been covered before in this forum and isn't open to
negotiation.
Regards,
-- Sarasvati
Thomas Lotze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2002-11-02 00:56:14 -0800:
Hi,
is there a reason mails from the Unicode list don't have a Reply-To
header pointing to [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Sorry to those who have received
private mail from me which was actually meant for the list...
Cheers, Thomas
Thomas Lotze scripsit:
is there a reason mails from the Unicode list don't have a Reply-To
header pointing to [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Sorry to those who have received
private mail from me which was actually meant for the list...
This is a very controversial point. For an argument on the
- Original Message -
From: John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Thomas Lotze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: Header Reply-To
For an argument on the don't-add-Reply-To
side, see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 11:36:31PM +0100, Stefan Persson wrote:
For an argument on the don't-add-Reply-To
side, see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html (no connection
between unicom and unicode).
Why doesn't that page follow the ASCII standard and/or any ASCII-based
standard?
- Original Message -
From: David Starner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Stefan Persson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 12:34 AM
Subject: Re: Header Reply-To
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 11:36:31PM +0100, Stefan Persson wrote:
For an argument on the don't-add
11 matches
Mail list logo
