From: Jony Rosenne (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Jun 14 2005 - 21:48:49 CDT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Gregg Reynolds
> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 2:40 AM
> To: Michael Everson
> Cc: Unicode Discussion
> Subject: Re: Arabic letters separated by markup
> Michael Everson wrote:
> > At 16:06 -0500 2005-06-14, Gregg Reynolds wrote:
> >> Now why would you take your own inability to imagine something as
> >> evidence that there is nothing to be imagined? Tsk. To
> anybody who
> >> knows Arabic the usefulness of such coloring is quite obvious; M.
> >> Kural's response is correct. I've seen elementary school
> texts that use
> >> such coloring.
> > And it's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. It's not plain
> text though.
> I don't understand your meaning. To me, "plain text" is a purely
> computational notion. It is therefore impossible in
> principle to judge
> whether or not an arrangement of ink on a page is plain text
> or not; in
> fact it is meaningless. So what precisely do you mean when
> you say it
> is not plain text?
Once you mention color your are definitely not plain text.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 14 2005 - 20:50:15 CDT