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 10:35:47 -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><87pqai64vm.fsf@gmail.com><93EFBD7DA657498389967C043BDF023D@us.oracle.com> <87ehqy36n1.fsf@micropit.couberia.bzh> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1336239369 6349 80.91.229.3 (5 May 2012 17:36:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 May 2012 17:36:09 +0000 (UTC) To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?'Peter_M=FCnster'?=" , Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 05 19:36:08 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 1SQitr-0002TL-E1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 19:36:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57785 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQitq-0002W9-RS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 13:36:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54944) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQito-0002W4-5Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 13:36:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQitm-0001E4-34 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 13:36:03 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:44478) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQitl-0001Dm-T3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 13:36:02 -0400 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q45HZtjX029403 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 5 May 2012 17:35:56 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt358.oracle.com (acsmt358.oracle.com [141.146.40.158]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q45HZtgv018021 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 5 May 2012 17:35:55 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt106.oracle.com (abhmt106.oracle.com [141.146.116.58]) by acsmt358.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q45HZsQD020299; Sat, 5 May 2012 12:35:54 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.221.111) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 05 May 2012 10:35:54 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <87ehqy36n1.fsf@micropit.couberia.bzh> Thread-Index: Ac0q4JoZ2Mr3jcLnTPS7BXfbvv/c/wAAW6aQ 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: 141.146.126.227 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:150298 Archived-At: > > When viewed as plain text, markup is noise/garbage/nonsense. > > What about > ,---- > | code... > `---- > or > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > code... > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > ? What about it? Is someone arguing that those are expected to be rendered specially by email clients instead of appearing as plain text? Not I, at least. > Aren't these even more noise/garbage/nonsense than > #+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp > code... > #+END_SRC > then? We come back to Eli's original question: "Do these BEGIN_SRC and END_SRC marks serve some useful purpose in mail messages?" If such scribblings are added by someone in order, as visible text, to point something out, then it could be argued that yes, the writer at least thought they added something. If they are added automatically as markup that is NOT intended to be seen as such, but is intended to be rendered by an email client, then the answer could also be yes. But only if most email clients actually render the markup instead of showing it as text. If they show it as text and that was not the intention then the answer is no, it does not serve a useful purpose. IOW, if it was intended as plain text then fine (though the writer's judgment might be questioned). If it was intended as markup to be rendered then it needs to be judged as effective markup. Is it in fact rendered by most email clients? And do we even want markup messages in this mailing list? Both questions apply, if the intention is rendered markup. This mailing list has decided that users should use plain text instead of relying on such rendering. At least in the case of HTML. And I would hope that what applies to HTML markup applies a fortiori to much less commonly handled markup, such as #+BEGIN_SRC. What if someone intended it to be rendered if possible but otherwise be shown as plain text - IOW, showing it as plain text was part of the intention? Can't argue with that. If that's what the writer wanted then so be it - see above. But that's not the answer that was given to Eli's question. The answer given was that this markup is intended to be rendered by Gnus, to prettify things. To that answer I said, (a) in most mail clients it does not work (the intention is thwarted) and (b) in this mailing list we do not encourage messages that require rendering. That's all.