|WikiProject Computing||(Rated Start-class, Top-importance)|
Merge with text file
- Discussion declined proposal - most opinions made a distinction between Plain text and non-plain text. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 17:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
The definition is bad – the article starts nicely explaining that plain text is text that lacks structurals and typographic markers, then it levitates into the blue, and avoids explaining the details about why plain text can be a good idea, and for what purpose. I must think about how to write this better... Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 17:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- I made one try to improve para 1, but para 3 and forth shoots wildly and imprecisely with their smoking guns!! (I believe para 4 just shoot para 1 to death)! Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 17:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
The file was tagged for not citing sources? Why? There's no explanation here. Why? Please add a comment on what is to be improved on the talk page, the one who required citations for something. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 13:43, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hi there, I'm more than happy to explain. For starters, consider the following language:
In computing, plain text is textual material in a computer file which is unformatted and without very much processing readable by simple computer tools such as line printing text commands, in Windows'es DOS window type, and in Unix terminal window cat.
- May I ask where this definition comes from? It is not only unsubstantiated by a citation to a reliable source, it seems to be a circular definition that conveys little or no new information to a General Audience. "plain text is textual material" ... "unformatted and without very much processing readable" ... ?
- Respectfully, this sounds very close to an ad-hoc definition for an already tenuous concept. It does not appear to be supported by any academic, professional, or journalistic documentation. If someone wanted to look up this definition and research it for themselves, where would they go? How would this definition survive scrutiny if challenged under WP:OR? dr.ef.tymac 13:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
- Update: I've added a merge recommendation. The previous rationale for opposing the merge didn't make much sense, and there still is zero substantiation for a stand-alone article on this subject, especially the primary definition in the lead of this article. dr.ef.tymac 16:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Text editors used on Unices
I am would add Emacs to the editors used in Unixy environments (and also on Mac OS X, which in fact is derived from (BSD) Unix). Nobody with functional minds uses "ed" for real world editing other than filtering, emacs would be much, much more appropriate in this list, its use is more widespread and it is much closer to what you call a text editor on a modern computer system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sebastian42 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
This makes no sense
[6 bits means] 64 characters -- which leaves no room for lower-case letters after you assign codes for A-Z, 0-9, and even one other code for space, punctuation, etc. I make 26 uppercase characters (A-Z), 10 numerals and "one character for punctuation" a total of 37; a long way from the 64 possible characters assignable in 6 bits. 64's enough for a complete lowercase set, or without lowercase 64 bits allows a whole festival of 28 punctuation characters. With lowercase there's space for 26 uppercase, 26 lowercase, 10 digits and 2 for punctuation, includingtheratherusefulspace. Tonywalton Talk 23:29, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- The subject statement also ignores the use and history of alternate code pages to stuff more characters into 64 bits. An example is the TeleTypeSetter ("TTS") telegraphy code introduced in 1928, which was broadly implemented in the newspaper publishing industry. Because it was inherently digital (6-bit) and the publishing industry was willing to pay for development, most fundamental word processing technology was developed using TTS, beginning in the early 1950s. By having two code pages --- one for the the shift keyboard and one for the unshifted keyboard (which requires only two characters to encode) --- the number of characters available in 6-bits was nearly doubled to 126 characters plus the two shift switch characters. See e.g., [TTS character set image]. Marbux (talk) 03:02, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
plain language vs plain text
As télécommunication industry defined both plain text and plain language. As télécommunication industry recommands both international alphabet n°5 (and ASCII) and international alphabet n°2 .
Shouldn't be a link be traced between both?
editor: PUBLISHED BY THE GENERAL SECRETARIAT OF THE INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION
- Thank you for that reference. The "plain language" defined on p. 23-24 of that document is an important influence on what is now known as "plain text" today, and I agree this article should mention it. --DavidCary (talk) 14:21, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Plain text, the Unicode definition
I'm not sure this qualifies for inclusion in the article, but a useful function of plain text is preventing code and commands from being inherited when information is copied from a web page or document and pasted into a new document. For example, if highlighting and copying something from a Wikipedia article, hyperlinks and font commands may also be included by the web browser. Likewise, when copying from a Microsoft Word document, a person might only want the text for another Word file, but end up with the font selection, color and other formatting that they don't need. Convert the next into plain text by pasting it into Notepad, then copy it right back out. —RRabbit42 (talk) 16:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)