William Overington wrote: > Actually I was trying in the posting upon which you comment > to suggest that, even if people do not agree with me about > having colour codes in a plain text file, they might > perhaps consider as a separate issue the adding into regular > Unicode of a zero width operator whose use would be > to indicate that a character, such as U+1362, should be > decorated chromatically.
Come on, William!! Adding such a "zero width operator" *is* having color in plain text! And adding such "zero width operators" *is* inserting mark up in plain text! > >I interpret your post as one more lengthy repetition of your > well-known > >opinion: differences between "plain text" and "rich text" > should not exist: > >they should be eliminated by incorporating the mark-up in > the encoding. > > Actually, that is not my opinion. No, I know. This is my explanation of my perception of your explanation of your opinion. Now I am not sure what your perception of my explanation of my perception of your explanation of your opinion might be. Gentlemen, communication is such a difficult art! > [...] > Perhaps some sort of consensus over nomenclature for three > categories of > text file could occur, namely plain text in the manner which > you like it, > plain text in the manner in which I like it and markup. > Maybe plain text, > enhanced text and markup would be suitable names. How do > people feel about > that please? I would suggest "proletarian text", "middle-class text" and "capitalist text", if I wasn't so scared that someone could take it seriously. > It is unfortunately the case in discussions that when someone > disagrees with > an idea that is put forward that he or she is more likely to > respond in > public than if he or she agrees with an idea which is put > forward, or has > simply read about the idea and just notes it as an > interesting possibility. > This can have the effect that many people may agree with an > idea or at least > not be against it yet make no comment, perhaps giving an > impression that an > idea is not well received at large when in fact that is not > necessarily the > case. Yes, definitely a difficult art. _ Marco
