Problem with this server?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
187 messages Options
12345 ... 10
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

defaria
On 08/18/2010 10:22 AM, Mike Easter wrote:
The html/ers want to change the state - the default behaviors, the accepted norm - of email and discussion newsgroups.
Utter non-sense. Show me one time that I've ever, I repeat EVER told you to use HTML except to illustrate the point that I don't. I challenge you. You will not find it because I never have. Nor have I ever seen any other person attempt to tell a plain texter to use HTML much less bemoan him constantly if he doesn't comply!
The plaintexters do not want that.
They are tilting at windmills. What they really want is for other people to do it their way.
Html is for webpages and webforums, not default email or default newsgroups.
There is nothing in the RFCs specifically outlawing HTML in either email or newsgroups and they work in both of those and people want to use it. In fact Netscape (the grandfather of Mozilla) pioneered it and put the code in to actually generate HTML. Just declaring your preferences does not make them the law or the standard.

Email is already largely HTML for most communications. Newsgroups are ignored by most people, probably because of the curmudgeon attitude like you seem to be proposing.
--
Andrew DeFaria
Suburbia: where they tear out the trees & then name streets after them.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

defaria
In reply to this post by Mike Easter-2
On 08/18/2010 11:13 AM, Mike Easter wrote:
The wish to change the 'turf' of the plaintexter (default email, default news) into html, because the html/ers prefer html, from a religious war perspective, is the invasion of a foreign religion.
Ain't nobody proselytizing you into using HTML as I said before. Additionally (save necessarily this server) you assert somehow the plaintexter owns the domain. Aside from the server owner themselves you, like me, are a guest here and as such you have no more dominion over what is posted or how it is posted. The owners here actually side with you and don't like HTML but they also do not strictly forbid it. As a guest then what gives you the right to tell me how to post?
The html religion has its own places of 'worship'. It shouldn't be invading some others' space.
It ain't your space!
It is the html proselytization that is the problem, not the plaintexters.
But HTML'ers do not proselytize - you do! We never tell you that you must post our way. You always tell us we must post your way? This is not even pot, kettle - black. This is your a black kettle and we aren't.
The plaintexters want to maintain the status quo.
The plaintexters want to remain in 1960. How's that black and white monitor working for you? I mean what have color - so wasteful!
In another thread you wished for the conversion of plaintext turf to html.
Not I. Are you saying that Phil did? Are you asserting the following is a wish? It ain't. It's a prediction. Nowhere did Phil even state that he wanted it. You're not too good at argumentation are you?
Phillip Jones wrote:
No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us) it will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their internet experience to be just like their web experience. How many Plain Text websites you see lately.
--
Andrew DeFaria
If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

defaria
In reply to this post by JoeS-3
On 08/18/2010 01:39 PM, JoeS wrote:
On 8/18/2010 11:44 AM, Ed Mullen wrote:
JoeS wrote:
On 8/17/2010 7:16 PM, clay wrote:
Is the server or this NG bjorken?
I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about HTML vs
plain text from like five years ago...
Must'a fell into the wayback machine.

HTML vs. Plaintext discussions never fail to create a lot of rancor.
Funny thing is, even if you send in plaintext, if you are using a Gecko
product, the actual display window is HTML.

Huh? Not unless you make that selection.
No, it doesn't matter what your view options are.
The gecko rendering is in a DOM window, exactly as I showed in the screenshot.
Technically, once rendered, it ain't HTML anymore. Therefore an argument can be made that it was never HTML to start with.
--
Andrew DeFaria
An error? Impossible! My modem is error correcting.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

defaria
In reply to this post by JoeS-3
On 08/18/2010 05:32 PM, JoeS wrote:
On 8/18/2010 5:58 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
I don't understand what you mean to show or prove in the screenshot.
I'm not trying to "prove" anything, just trying to show that the Gecko rendering engine is basically a DOM window, which is, in and of itself, an HTML representation of sent data, whatever the original format is. There is no real plaintext in the Gecko rendering engine. Has nothing to do with what was actually sent. Just thought it was ironic that plaintext was actually viewed with HTML tools.
HTML is a source format not a rendered format. If TB says "Hey this is a plain text message and I'm gonna render it as a visual in the same manner as I would an HTML source document that is requesting a fixed font" that is not the same as saying it's HTML. It's not. It's a rendered thing which has long since past what is known as HTML.
--
Andrew DeFaria
There's too much blood in my caffeine system.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

Jay Garcia
In reply to this post by defaria
On 18.08.2010 23:15, Andrew DeFaria wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

>   On 08/18/2010 01:39 PM, JoeS wrote:
>> On 8/18/2010 11:44 AM, Ed Mullen wrote:
>>> JoeS wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2010 7:16 PM, clay wrote:
>>>>> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
>>>>> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about HTML vs
>>>>> plain text from like five years ago...
>>>>> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.
>>>>
>>>> HTML vs. Plaintext discussions never fail to create a lot of rancor.
>>>> Funny thing is, even if you send in plaintext, if you are using a Gecko
>>>> product, the actual display window is HTML.
>>>
>>> Huh? Not unless you make that selection.
>> No, it doesn't matter what your view options are.
>> The gecko rendering is in a DOM window, exactly as I showed in the screenshot.
> Technically, once rendered, it ain't HTML anymore. Therefore an argument can be
> made that it was never HTML to start with.
> --
> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
> An error? Impossible! My modem is error correcting.

So then, by that way of thinking, .ASP rendered to readable text isn't
.ASP any longer and therefore never was. 8-)


--
*Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion*
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Flock - Thunderbird
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

defaria
On 08/19/2010 05:17 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
So then, by that way of thinking, .ASP rendered to readable text isn't .ASP any longer and therefore never was. 8-)
I didn't say "never was" but aside from that, yes you're right.
--
Andrew DeFaria
Imagination is more important than knowledge. - Albert Einstein

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

»Q«
In reply to this post by PhillipJones
In <news:[hidden email]>,
Phillip Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Tarkus wrote:
> > On 8/17/2010 4:16 PM, clay wrote:  
> >> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
> >> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about HTML vs
> >> plain text from like five years ago...
> >> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.  
> >
> > Heh.  I'm pretty sure five years from now you'll see the same
> > posts.  
> No the exact same post. But the same subject.
>
> No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us) it
> will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their internet
> experience to be just like their web experience.

The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their web
experience will just continue to use web forums instead of newsgroups
and facebook messages instead of e-mails.

--
»Q«                                                              /"\
                                    ASCII Ribbon Campaign        \ /
                                     against html e-mail          X
                                 <http://www.asciiribbon.org/>   / \
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

Ed Mullen
»Q« wrote:

> In<news:[hidden email]>,
> Phillip Jones<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> Tarkus wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2010 4:16 PM, clay wrote:
>>>> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
>>>> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about HTML vs
>>>> plain text from like five years ago...
>>>> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.
>>>
>>> Heh.  I'm pretty sure five years from now you'll see the same
>>> posts.
>> No the exact same post. But the same subject.
>>
>> No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us) it
>> will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their internet
>> experience to be just like their web experience.
>
> The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their web
> experience will just continue to use web forums instead of newsgroups
> and facebook messages instead of e-mails.
>

What about those of us who embrace both worlds?

I am a Usenet user.  There are some Web Forums I use too. And most of my
online usage is the Web or client-based email.  But it is a mix.

It is a narrow and bad tack to make generalizations about users.  The
nice thing about "the Web" is that it can be almost anything.



--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
Time is nature's way of keeping everything from happening all at once.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

»Q«
In <news:[hidden email]>,
Ed Mullen <[hidden email]> wrote:

> »Q« wrote:
> > In<news:[hidden email]>,
> > Phillip Jones<[hidden email]>  wrote:
> >
> >> Tarkus wrote:
> >>> On 8/17/2010 4:16 PM, clay wrote:
> >>>> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
> >>>> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about HTML
> >>>> vs plain text from like five years ago...
> >>>> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.
> >>>
> >>> Heh.  I'm pretty sure five years from now you'll see the same
> >>> posts.
> >> No the exact same post. But the same subject.
> >>
> >> No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us) it
> >> will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their
> >> internet experience to be just like their web experience.
> >
> > The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their web
> > experience will just continue to use web forums instead of
> > newsgroups and facebook messages instead of e-mails.
>
> What about those of us who embrace both worlds?

Probably you'll keep posting plain text in news groups.  I just don't
see Phillip's "popular demand" materializing.

> I am a Usenet user.  There are some Web Forums I use too. And most of
> my online usage is the Web or client-based email.  But it is a mix.

Me too.
 
> It is a narrow and bad tack to make generalizations about users.  The
> nice thing about "the Web" is that it can be almost anything.

But you and I don't seem to be in the same boat Phillip was talking
about, "the people" who want everything to be like their web experience.

--
»Q«                                                              /"\
                                    ASCII Ribbon Campaign        \ /
                                     against html e-mail          X
                                 <http://www.asciiribbon.org/>   / \
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

PhillipJones
»Q« wrote:

> In<news:[hidden email]>,
> Ed Mullen<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> »Q« wrote:
>>> In<news:[hidden email]>,
>>> Phillip Jones<[hidden email]>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tarkus wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/2010 4:16 PM, clay wrote:
>>>>>> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
>>>>>> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about HTML
>>>>>> vs plain text from like five years ago...
>>>>>> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Heh.  I'm pretty sure five years from now you'll see the same
>>>>> posts.
>>>> No the exact same post. But the same subject.
>>>>
>>>> No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us) it
>>>> will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their
>>>> internet experience to be just like their web experience.
>>>
>>> The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their web
>>> experience will just continue to use web forums instead of
>>> newsgroups and facebook messages instead of e-mails.
>>
>> What about those of us who embrace both worlds?
>
> Probably you'll keep posting plain text in news groups.  I just don't
> see Phillip's "popular demand" materializing.
>
>> I am a Usenet user.  There are some Web Forums I use too. And most of
>> my online usage is the Web or client-based email.  But it is a mix.
>
> Me too.
>
>> It is a narrow and bad tack to make generalizations about users.  The
>> nice thing about "the Web" is that it can be almost anything.
>
> But you and I don't seem to be in the same boat Phillip was talking
> about, "the people" who want everything to be like their web experience.
>
Oh I want usenet as well. In fact my experience with Jive Clearspace
Form (written totally in javascript (yes you heard that right) in the
adobe forums, a what ever the Mactopia Groups Microsoft has for Mac
Users. I'd just as soon the it back 100 percent  NNTP though in HTML
format, for those.

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net        mailto:[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

sean bean
In reply to this post by »Q«
On 8/19/2010 8:46 PM, »Q« wrote:

> In<news:[hidden email]>,
> Ed Mullen<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> »Q« wrote:
>>> In<news:[hidden email]>,
>>> Phillip Jones<[hidden email]>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tarkus wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/2010 4:16 PM, clay wrote:
>>>>>> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
>>>>>> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about HTML
>>>>>> vs plain text from like five years ago...
>>>>>> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Heh.  I'm pretty sure five years from now you'll see the same
>>>>> posts.
>>>> No the exact same post. But the same subject.
>>>>
>>>> No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us) it
>>>> will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their
>>>> internet experience to be just like their web experience.
>>>
>>> The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their web
>>> experience will just continue to use web forums instead of
>>> newsgroups and facebook messages instead of e-mails.
>>
>> What about those of us who embrace both worlds?
>
> Probably you'll keep posting plain text in news groups.  I just don't
> see Phillip's "popular demand" materializing.

you and the plain texters are the reason there are only so few posts in
this newsgroup anymore...

the web has evolved...

plain txters are modern luddites...

sean
--
Youth is when you blame all your troubles on your parents...
... Maturity is when you learn that everything is the fault of the
younger generation

  ** taglines brought to you by tagzilla 0.066.2
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

»Q«
In reply to this post by PhillipJones
In <news:[hidden email]>,
Phillip Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:

> »Q« wrote:
> > In<news:[hidden email]>,
> > Ed Mullen<[hidden email]>  wrote:
> >  
> >> »Q« wrote:  
> >>> In<news:[hidden email]>,
> >>> Phillip Jones<[hidden email]>   wrote:
> >>>  
> >>>> Tarkus wrote:  
> >>>>> On 8/17/2010 4:16 PM, clay wrote:  
> >>>>>> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
> >>>>>> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about
> >>>>>> HTML vs plain text from like five years ago...
> >>>>>> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.  
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Heh.  I'm pretty sure five years from now you'll see the same
> >>>>> posts.  
> >>>> No the exact same post. But the same subject.
> >>>>
> >>>> No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us)
> >>>> it will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their
> >>>> internet experience to be just like their web experience.  
> >>>
> >>> The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their
> >>> web experience will just continue to use web forums instead of
> >>> newsgroups and facebook messages instead of e-mails.  
> >>
> >> What about those of us who embrace both worlds?  
> >
> > Probably you'll keep posting plain text in news groups.  I just
> > don't see Phillip's "popular demand" materializing.
> >  
> >> I am a Usenet user.  There are some Web Forums I use too. And most
> >> of my online usage is the Web or client-based email.  But it is a
> >> mix.  
> >
> > Me too.
> >  
> >> It is a narrow and bad tack to make generalizations about users.
> >> The nice thing about "the Web" is that it can be almost anything.  
> >
> > But you and I don't seem to be in the same boat Phillip was talking
> > about, "the people" who want everything to be like their web
> > experience.
>
> Oh I want usenet as well. In fact my experience with Jive Clearspace
> Form (written totally in javascript (yes you heard that right) in the
> adobe forums, a what ever the Mactopia Groups Microsoft has for Mac
> Users. I'd just as soon the it back 100 percent  NNTP though in HTML
> format, for those.

My point was that you're one of the few who want an all-html Usenet.
The "popular demand" you claimed would move newsgroups to switch to
html just isn't in evidence.  html-capable news clients have been
around since early in the first browser wars and there's been very
little demand for it all this time.

(And yeah, I see you were predicting that popular demand will be there
in the future, but I just don't see any reason to think your prediction
might be correct.)

--
»Q«                                                              /"\
                                    ASCII Ribbon Campaign        \ /
                                     against html e-mail          X
                                 <http://www.asciiribbon.org/>   / \
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

»Q«
In reply to this post by sean bean
In <news:[hidden email]>,
sean bean <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8/19/2010 8:46 PM, »Q« wrote:
> > In<news:[hidden email]>,
> > Ed Mullen<[hidden email]>  wrote:
> >
> >> »Q« wrote:

> >>> The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their
> >>> web experience will just continue to use web forums instead of
> >>> newsgroups and facebook messages instead of e-mails.
> >>
> >> What about those of us who embrace both worlds?
> >
> > Probably you'll keep posting plain text in news groups.  I just
> > don't see Phillip's "popular demand" materializing.
>
> you and the plain texters are the reason there are only so few posts
> in this newsgroup anymore...

It's not clear what you mean by "plain texter" -- your own post was in
plain text.  Do you mean the people who wouldn't read your posts if you
switched to posting html?

> the web has evolved...

This isn't the web.  And the web hasn't "evolved" to use html;  it
*always* used html.

> plain txters are modern luddites...

That's silly.

--
»Q«                                                              /"\
                                    ASCII Ribbon Campaign        \ /
                                     against html e-mail          X
                                 <http://www.asciiribbon.org/>   / \
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

PhillipJones
In reply to this post by »Q«
»Q« wrote:

> In<news:[hidden email]>,
> Phillip Jones<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> »Q« wrote:
>>> In<news:[hidden email]>,
>>> Ed Mullen<[hidden email]>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> »Q« wrote:
>>>>> In<news:[hidden email]>,
>>>>> Phillip Jones<[hidden email]>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Tarkus wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/2010 4:16 PM, clay wrote:
>>>>>>>> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
>>>>>>>> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about
>>>>>>>> HTML vs plain text from like five years ago...
>>>>>>>> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Heh.  I'm pretty sure five years from now you'll see the same
>>>>>>> posts.
>>>>>> No the exact same post. But the same subject.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us)
>>>>>> it will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their
>>>>>> internet experience to be just like their web experience.
>>>>>
>>>>> The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their
>>>>> web experience will just continue to use web forums instead of
>>>>> newsgroups and facebook messages instead of e-mails.
>>>>
>>>> What about those of us who embrace both worlds?
>>>
>>> Probably you'll keep posting plain text in news groups.  I just
>>> don't see Phillip's "popular demand" materializing.
>>>
>>>> I am a Usenet user.  There are some Web Forums I use too. And most
>>>> of my online usage is the Web or client-based email.  But it is a
>>>> mix.
>>>
>>> Me too.
>>>
>>>> It is a narrow and bad tack to make generalizations about users.
>>>> The nice thing about "the Web" is that it can be almost anything.
>>>
>>> But you and I don't seem to be in the same boat Phillip was talking
>>> about, "the people" who want everything to be like their web
>>> experience.
>>
>> Oh I want usenet as well. In fact my experience with Jive Clearspace
>> Form (written totally in javascript (yes you heard that right) in the
>> adobe forums, a what ever the Mactopia Groups Microsoft has for Mac
>> Users. I'd just as soon the it back 100 percent  NNTP though in HTML
>> format, for those.
>
> My point was that you're one of the few who want an all-html Usenet.
> The "popular demand" you claimed would move newsgroups to switch to
> html just isn't in evidence.  html-capable news clients have been
> around since early in the first browser wars and there's been very
> little demand for it all this time.
>
> (And yeah, I see you were predicting that popular demand will be there
> in the future, but I just don't see any reason to think your prediction
> might be correct.)
>

No what I said  please re read. Although I left off a couple of words in
my last sentence.

  I'd just as soon the it back 100 percent  NNTP though in HTML format,
for those *that want or need it*.

No, there is a place for plain text such as here. But there also place
on NNTP for people that want to use HTML.

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net        mailto:[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

Jay Garcia
In reply to this post by sean bean
On 21.08.2010 12:59, sean bean wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> On 8/19/2010 8:46 PM, »Q« wrote:
>> In<news:[hidden email]>,
>> Ed Mullen<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>
>>> »Q« wrote:
>>>> In<news:[hidden email]>,
>>>> Phillip Jones<[hidden email]>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Tarkus wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/2010 4:16 PM, clay wrote:
>>>>>>> Is the server or this NG bjorken?
>>>>>>> I looked in today and I see all these posts sniveling about HTML
>>>>>>> vs plain text from like five years ago...
>>>>>>> Must'a fell into the wayback machine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heh.  I'm pretty sure five years from now you'll see the same
>>>>>> posts.
>>>>> No the exact same post. But the same subject.
>>>>>
>>>>> No by then. by popular demand of the consuming audience not (us) it
>>>>> will have changed to all HTML. Because they will want their
>>>>> internet experience to be just like their web experience.
>>>>
>>>> The people who want their "internet" experience to be like their web
>>>> experience will just continue to use web forums instead of
>>>> newsgroups and facebook messages instead of e-mails.
>>>
>>> What about those of us who embrace both worlds?
>>
>> Probably you'll keep posting plain text in news groups.  I just don't
>> see Phillip's "popular demand" materializing.
>
> you and the plain texters are the reason there are only so few posts in
> this newsgroup anymore...
>
> the web has evolved...

Technically this isn't the "web". There were news servers, groups and so
forth long before "the web" evolved. There was no "html" in the days
prior to "the web".

> plain txters are modern luddites...

Plain text is the universal written method of communication that is
understood by most readers (human readers that is).

There is no reason to use anything but plain text when communicating at
the base level of understanding.

> sean

I like html but in it's proper venue. The support venue is a plain text
medium unless you're in a multimedia type support arena.

--
*Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion*
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Flock - Thunderbird

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

defaria
On 08/21/2010 08:55 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
Technically this isn't the "web".
Technically... HTML is nothing but plain text. Since we're getting technical here...
--
Andrew DeFaria
Assassins do it from behind.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

Tarkus-3
On 8/21/2010 10:45 PM, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
> On 08/21/2010 08:55 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>> Technically this isn't the "web".
> Technically... HTML is nothing but plain text. Since we're getting
> technical here...

Heh.  :)
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

Mike Easter-2
In reply to this post by defaria
Andrew DeFaria wrote:

> Technically... HTML is nothing but plain text. Since we're getting
> technical here...

A useful definition of plain text is that it is unformatted, as
contrasted with various types of formatted text, such as styled or rich
text, which styling includes markup languages.

So, html is not *plain* text, but marked up/ formatted/ (non-plain)
text. That marking up can be done with 'ascii-type' (text-only) markings
and html does not necessarily include any binary when it is text-only.
(Text-only does *not* at all mean the same as plain text in this context).

(And ontheotherhand howsomeever) Plain text these days can include
/more/ than ascii, such as unicode UTF-8.

We should not get our character encoding terms mixed up with our
formatting (markup) terms.

Some other types of text formatting may introduce and include binary
'stuff' such as some word processor formats and .pdf.


--
Mike Easter
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

defaria


On 08/22/2010 12:41 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
Andrew DeFaria wrote:

Technically... HTML is nothing but plain text. Since we're getting technical here...

A useful definition of plain text is that it is unformatted, as contrasted with various types of formatted text, such as styled or rich text, which styling includes markup languages.
But we weren't talking about "useful definitions" - we were talking about "technically speaking" - which is specifically why I chose the words that I chose. Don't change the point to bolster your not so hidden agenda.
So, html is not *plain* text,
Actually yes it is. It is of the ASCII character set and nothing more. Sure it has certain semantic meaning or mark ups. Irrelevant! Technically it's plain text.
but marked up/ formatted/ (non-plain) text. That marking up can be done with 'ascii-type' (text-only) markings and html
Huh? You mean the silly *bold text* type quote/unquote "ASCII-type" (text-only) as you call it. HTML is only ASCII and only text! Sorry Michael but your point is totally off mark here. If you wish to charge HTML as not being plain enough text for you because <b>bold text</b> indicates that that text should be made bold then you have to indite your beloved "plain text" on the same charge since *bold text* also means make it bold in only slightly less characters. IOW the *'s are as much "tags" or "markup".To argue otherwise is just plainly dishonest.
does not necessarily include any binary when it is text-only. (Text-only does *not* at all mean the same as plain text in this context).
You're shifting definitions in a ill-attempt to make a point and failing miserably. Technically HTML is nothing but pure and plain ASCII text. In fact it would be illegal HTML to have non ASCII/non plain text in it. Face it you lost this argument (but I'm sure you'll persist nonetheless with illogical redefinitions of common terms to make it appear as if you have a point).
(And ontheotherhand howsomeever) Plain text these days can include /more/ than ascii, such as unicode UTF-8.

We should not get our character encoding terms mixed up with our formatting (markup) terms.
Nor our ASCII-type text-only mixed up with what(?) - I have no idea!
Some other types of text formatting may introduce and include binary 'stuff' such as some word processor formats and .pdf.
Can you say red herring? Sure you can. We're not talking about this and to mention it only shows you participating in a red herring.
--
Andrew DeFaria
2400 Baud makes you want to get out and push!!

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Problem with this server?

Mike Easter-2
Andrew DeFaria wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>
>>> Technically... HTML is nothing but plain text. Since we're getting
>>> technical here...
>>
>> A useful definition of plain text is that it is unformatted, as
>> contrasted with various types of formatted text, such as styled or
>> rich text, which styling includes markup languages.

> But we weren't talking about "useful definitions" - we were talking
> about "technically speaking" - which is specifically why I chose the
> words that I chose. Don't change the point to bolster your not so hidden
> agenda.

When you chose your words, you chose your words badly. You should have
said that html is 'text-only' markup, as opposed to plain text which is
not markup at all.

>> So, html is not *plain* text,

> Actually yes it is.

Actually no, it is not.

> It is of the ASCII character set and nothing more.

That makes it 'text-only' as I explained, because the term 'plain text'
means something that is *not* html because plain text is not marked up
while html is/ can be/ marked up test-only (ascii if you must).



--
Mike Easter
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
12345 ... 10