Re: ASCII convention
- From: Ruud Harmsen <realemailseesite13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:26:38 +0200
Mon, 10 Oct 2005 19:02:22 GMT: "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:
>> Many people think just the opposite. Anyway, it's a reality in this
>> medium. Just as it's a reality that by writing *foo* you make some
>> people see foo in bold, some people see *foo* in bold, and some people
>> just *foo* with no typographic feature.
>
>You seem to suggest that html is acceptable in newsgroups. It isn't.
The conventions *bold*, /italic/ and _underlined_ are not html.
--
Ruud Harmsen - http://rudhar.com
.
- References:
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Christopher Culver
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Jukka K. Korpela
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Jukka K. Korpela
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Joachim Pense
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Joachim Pense
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Yusuf B Gursey
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Jukka K. Korpela
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Jukka K. Korpela
- Re: ASCII convention
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: ASCII convention
- Prev by Date: Re: Albanian spelling
- Next by Date: French pronunciation of Ockeghem
- Previous by thread: Re: ASCII convention
- Next by thread: Re: ASCII convention
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|