On 02/05/2003 12:24:39 PM jameskass wrote: >The advantages of using P14 tags (...equals lang IDs mark-up) is >that runs of text could be tagged *in a standard fashion* and >preserved in plain-text.
Sure, but why do we want to place so much demand on plain text when the vast majority of content we interchange is in some form of marked-up or rich text? Let's let plain text be that -- plain -- and look to the markup conventions that we've invested so much in and that are working for us to provide the kinds of thing that we designed markup for in the first place. Besides, a "plain-text" file that begins and ends with p14 tags is a marked-up file, whether someone calls it "plain text" or not. We have little or no infrastructure for handling that form of markup, and a large and increasing amount of infrastructure for handling the more typical forms of markup. I repeat, plain text remains legible without anything indicating which eng (or whatever) may be preferred by the author, and (since the requirement for plain text is legibility) therefore this is not really an argument for using p14 language tags. IMO. - Peter --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485
