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: BEGIN_SRC..END_SRC Date: Sat, 5 May 2012 10:36:00 -0700 Message-ID: References: <871umzrvfw.fsf@gmail.com> <87wr4rqg6g.fsf@gmail.com><83d36j59gv.fsf@gnu.org> <87r4uz58e3.fsf@sec.modprobe.de><83aa1n57p4.fsf@gnu.org><5D17181ED92C4552AE8D4404DD035CA0@us.oracle.com><87ehqy7hod.fsf@gmail.com> <87wr4qzihq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1336239383 6466 80.91.229.3 (5 May 2012 17:36:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 May 2012 17:36:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Stephen J. Turnbull'" , "'Yann Hodique'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 05 19:36:23 2012 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 1SQiu4-0002dq-UK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 19:36:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58382 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQiu4-0002q2-Al for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 13:36:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55096) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQiu1-0002pt-6Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 13:36:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQitz-0001Ip-15 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 13:36:16 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com ([148.87.113.117]:31350) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQity-0001Ho-QC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 13:36:14 -0400 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by rcsinet15.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q45HaBQY031727 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 5 May 2012 17:36:11 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt356.oracle.com (acsmt356.oracle.com [141.146.40.156]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q45Ha8Oq018118 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 5 May 2012 17:36:10 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt111.oracle.com (abhmt111.oracle.com [141.146.116.63]) by acsmt356.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q45Ha8fX011985; Sat, 5 May 2012 12:36:08 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.221.111) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 05 May 2012 10:36:07 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <87wr4qzihq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Thread-Index: Ac0q3jJhsR3Z20s1RFm0dF1IPFTK4AAAQf/g X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 148.87.113.117 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:150299 Archived-At: > > Although the comparison with HTML is probably not that fair, > > No, and I would think Drew in particular would avoid comparing a > properly standardized vulgarity to a complete atrocity. But them's > the breaks. I'm having trouble telling which, in your eyes, is the "properly standardized vulgarity" and which is the "complete atrocity". Does it matter? In any case, I did not compare HTML markup with Org/Gnus/Emacs markup, however you might characterize either of them. What I did was to ask that all such markup be kept out of plain-text messages. I do not _see_ HTML markup displayed as such in mail messages (instead it is rendered), but that's because my email client, like _most_, takes care of that. And that was my other point: Emacs mail clients are not the only mail clients, or even the most commonly used mail clients. And even Emacs mail clients presumably do not display HTML markup in plain-text messages. Most mail clients most often DTRT with most HTML markup - they can tell the difference from plain text. That's the comparison I made and the one that matters here: not the markup itself but how it is handled by most email clients. HTML markup is handled relatively well by the world; Org/Gnus markup is not. If most email clients in the wide world recognized Org/Gnus markup and performed Emacs font-locking on it, then I would not be arguing the second point. (I would still argue that such markup does not belong in a message purporting to be plain text.)