Re: HTML better for small PDAs

[John Stracke <francis at ecal.com>]

graham.travers at BT.COM wrote:

> In my, limited, coding experience, I don't recall finding ASCII diagrams as
> part of the code.  Poor diagrammatic capability is one of the problems I
> have with ASCII.

Oh, ASCII art.  I dunno; I've never used it.  It's often not very useful; it's
nice for packet formats, but a lot of the time I think it's done because people
believe pictures are better, and ASCII art is the only pictures they can make.
If you really can't do without it, check out
<http://www.sigsoftware.com/emaileffects/> (Mac and Windows) or
pbmtoascii (Unix).

> You previous point about people choosing to use a "copy
> that's easier for some people to read" is interesting.  Doesn't it imply
> that we should consider other formats ?

Argh.  My point was *exactly* the opposite: that, when there exist multiple
formats, it is likely that some of them will be wrong; therefore, the only safe
approach is to have exactly one format.

<plonk>

--
/==============================================================\
|John Stracke    | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.|
|Chief Scientist |=============================================|
|eCal Corp.      |Round up the usual disclaimers.              |
|francis at ecal.com|                                             |
\==============================================================/