From: Tim Greenwood (timothy.greenwood@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Jun 15 2005 - 14:35:07 CDT
On 6/15/05, Gregg Reynolds <unicode@arabink.com> wrote:
> The point being that we always have these two things - text and its
> representation - and we don't have (or use, at least) precise
> terminology for talking about them. It's misleading and confusing to
> say that multicolored text is not plaintext when in fact we have no way
> of inferring the form of the original coded message based solely on its
> representation.
I love these semantic discussions and your argument has merit. However
for this list the salient point is that the Unicode standard says (and
should say) as much about how any application colors any part of text
as the ASCII standard says how emacs should color the keywords in C
program listing.
Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 15 2005 - 14:38:56 CDT