From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: ASCII-only startup message? Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 16:17:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2dc99848-b6d5-4f53-b22c-66e29d15647c@default> References: <567ECD8C.1070408@cs.ucla.edu> <8360zlhy7x.fsf@gnu.org> <567EE043.9020109@cs.ucla.edu> <83y4chgh5q.fsf@gnu.org> <567EED47.1090700@cs.ucla.edu> <83si2pgci8.fsf@gnu.org> <567F22B1.9040702@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1451175503 25209 80.91.229.3 (27 Dec 2015 00:18:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2015 00:18:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert , Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 27 01:18:10 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aCz2I-0004TM-77 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2015 01:18:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40397 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aCz2H-0006OX-Fe for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 19:18:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42678) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aCz25-0006OP-0a for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 19:17:58 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aCz23-0006LW-VC for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 19:17:56 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:32887) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aCz20-0006LA-5c; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 19:17:52 -0500 Original-Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id tBR0HdZF019734 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 27 Dec 2015 00:17:40 GMT Original-Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tBR0Hdqg019181 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 27 Dec 2015 00:17:39 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0010.oracle.com (abhmp0010.oracle.com [141.146.116.16]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tBR0Hdpf029886; Sun, 27 Dec 2015 00:17:39 GMT In-Reply-To: <567F22B1.9040702@cs.ucla.edu> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:196943 Archived-At: > > The ugliness argument was about the grave accent, `, not about > > the apostrophe. >=20 > Although the ugliness argument is primarily about the grave > accent, it is also about the apostrophe. With most fonts > =E2=80=9CThere=E2=80=99s=E2=80=9D looks nicer than =E2=80=9CThere's=E2=80= =9D, and it=E2=80=99s better typography > in English. This is completely wrong. Do you have a reference to back up such a claim? I have never seen any doc or typography guideline that favors a quotation mark over an apostrophe for English contractions, possessives, or non-word plurals. Quite the contrary. These use cases are precisely the raison d'=C3=AAtre for the apostrophe. Start here: http://english.stackexchange.com/a/36048/51214 (And please consider fasting from kool-aid ASAP, would be my recommendation.)=20 > Either character will do, but there seems little point uglifying > the former into the latter. What was the point in uglifying the latter (apostrophe) into the former (right single quotation mark)? > To try to avoid spending more of our time about whether to use > straight or curved apostrophes, I reworded the commentary to omit > the apostrophes. I tightened it up a bit while I was at it. Hallelujah! We are saved! ASCII saves, and we can save as ASCII! (But it is not about straight vs curved apostrophes. Any ol' apostrophe will do. It's about apostrophes vs single quotation marks.) Anyway, it's the _wrong thing_. Or if it helps you understand better: it=E2=80=99s the _wrong thing_.