Received: from webgate.proteosys.de (mail.proteosys-ag.com [62.225.9.49]) by lucy.proteosys (8.11.0/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id f1F1NeH07517 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:40 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1F1Ned08696 . for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:40 +0100 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1F1Nd702710 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:39 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C096ED.ED5BB600" Received: from mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.56]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA04246 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:39 +0100 (MET) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1F1NcM18132 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:38 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <5.C08A8DB2@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 2:23:31 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 488109 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:35 +0100 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (mail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.234]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA02764 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:33 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA53962 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:34 +0100 Received: from ns.mccme.ru (ns.mccme.ru [195.133.68.22]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1F1NYx25712 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:23:34 +0100 (MET) Received: from cherepan.UUCP (uucp@localhost) by ns.mccme.ru (8.8.5/8.8.5) with UUCP id EAA19195 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 04:06:04 +0300 Received: by cherepan.mccme.ru (dMail for DOS v2.07b5, 02Jan00); Thu, 15 Feb 2001 04:17:30 +0300 Lines: 20 References: Your message of "Fri, 09 Feb 2001 22:50:15 +0100." Return-Path: X-Mailer: dMail [Demos Mail for DOS v2.07b5] Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Why markup? Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:17:30 +0100 Message-ID: <2.07b5.ST1X.G8RY96@cherepan.mccme.ru> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Alexander Cherepanov" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3930 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096ED.ED5BB600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 12-Feb-01 14:53 Hans Aberg wrote: > This is exactly my point: Because of the lousy parsing of the computer > programs, one is forced to do markup, so that they can get the = information. 14-Feb-01 21:45 Hans Aberg wrote: >> Editor writes: The gap in the last formula [i.e. \mskip20mu] = should be >> made like in the first one and the $gap$ should be made like in = the >> second one. > The answer is as always: If you can parse it without markup, then it = is > possible to parse it, right? If you, or other humans, cannot parse it = that > way without markup, then don't expect the computer do it for you. :-) So (my) conclusion is: since there are cases which cannot be parsed by a human, markup is not only for stupid computers but is unavoidable in principle and is essential when you express such delicate things as thoughts in such a coarse form as a written text. Sasha ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096ED.ED5BB600 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Why markup?

12-Feb-01 14:53 Hans Aberg wrote:
> This is exactly my point: Because of the lousy = parsing of the computer
> programs, one is forced to do markup, so that = they can get the information.

14-Feb-01 21:45 Hans Aberg wrote:
>>    Editor writes: The gap in = the last formula [i.e. \mskip20mu] should be
>>    made like in the first one = and the $gap$ should be made like in the
>>    second one.

> The answer is as always: If you can parse it = without markup, then it is
> possible to parse it, right? If you, or other = humans, cannot parse it that
> way without markup, then don't expect the = computer do it for you. :-)

So (my) conclusion is: since there are cases which = cannot be parsed by a
human, markup is not only for stupid computers but is = unavoidable in
principle and is essential when you express such = delicate things as
thoughts in such a coarse form as a written = text.

Sasha

------_=_NextPart_001_01C096ED.ED5BB600--