Re: Qamats Qatan (was Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?)

From: John Hudson (
Date: Thu May 20 2004 - 00:18:34 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: ISO 15924 codes for ConScript"

    Jony Rosenne wrote:

    >>*Except by Jony, who is always encouraging us to use markup
    >>to make distinctions.

    > I don't recall saying anything like this in this Phoenician discussion.

    Acknowledged. My point was not about that discussion in particular, but about the generic
    question of to what degree plain-text is a requirement, regardless of what one wants to do
    within it. Your frequent refrain that distinctions of shape, for what you consider to be
    the same character (and note that I am not agreeing or disagreeing with any particular
    judgement), should be handled in 'mark-up' presupposes something other than plain-text in
    terms of displaying that distinction. You frequently remind us that there are distinctions
    that are useful to some people, desirable in some circumstances, but which do not
    constitute a *requirement* in plain-text. Fair enough. For this same reason, I don't
    automatically accept the argument, made by Michael earlier today, that 'There is a
    requirement for distinction for X in plain-text'.

    On what basis do we decide that X is necessary in plain-text while Y should be done with
    mark-up or some other 'higher level protocol'?

    John Hudson

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 20 2004 - 00:20:04 CDT