Re: Fixed Width Spaces

From: Peter Kirk (
Date: Mon Apr 05 2004 - 18:08:35 EDT

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Doulos SIL (was: French typographic thin space)"

    On 05/04/2004 13:47, Michael Everson wrote:

    > At 13:35 -0700 2004-04-05, Peter Kirk wrote:
    >>> The implication here is that plain text Unicode would be
    >>> used for legal documents. Given that my lawyer would send me emails
    >>> in highly marked up format, I find this very difficult to grasp. Is
    >>> there any evidence that plain text is even being considered for use
    >>> in legal documents?
    >> Evidence attached - one of many such legal texts on my computer,
    >> nearly all plain text only.
    > You are chasing a chimera, Peter.

    Yes, in the dictionary sense "A fanciful mental illusion or
    fabrication." That is a very good description of Mike's nonsencical
    statements that all legal texts are necessarily highly marked up. For
    once I can endorse Philippe's clear explanation of the situation.

    Now I agree that modern lawyers are likely to send out nicely formatted
    e-mails. At least they need to seem to justify their exorbitant fees by
    flashy presentation. But the formatting is just formatting and has
    absolutely no legal significance.

    By the way, I am not trying to make any argument here about fixed width
    spaces, just trying to correct a factual error in Mike's posting.

    Peter Kirk (personal) (work)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 05 2004 - 18:50:20 EDT