Re: Purpose of plain text (WAS: Re: combining: half, double, triple et cetera ad infinitum)

From: David Starner <>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:23:36 -0800

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Naena Guru <> wrote:
> Having said all that, all is not so bad. I say transliterate to Latin and
> make smartfonts. It is a proven success.

Really. Because every case I know of, differing font standards have
made it a complete pain. For over a decade, Project Gutenberg had a
partial copy of the Swedish bible in an unknown code-page. Eventually,
someone took the time to figure out that it was mostly an old DOS
code-page, and if that was true, the remaining characters that were
displaying wrong must be curly quotes, and hand-transliterated it into
Unicode. Unicode means I'll never have to do that, that text in
Swedish or Sinhala or Russian will maintain its meaning no matter how
the technology changes.

There are thousands of standards based on the concept of plain text.
This email has no font information attached; neither does Twitter,
most IMs, cellphone texts, etc. Whatever you think of Unicode,
smartfonts completely fail in so many environments. I'm tired of
seeing üÔÏ ÓÏÏÂÝÅÎÉÅ Ñ×ÌÑÅÔÓÑ ÒÕÓÓËÉÊ ÑÚÙË where I should see Это
сообщение является русский язык. My mail man has told me he wouldn't

Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero.
Received on Mon Nov 14 2011 - 16:25:45 CST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Nov 14 2011 - 16:25:45 CST