- From: Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 20:52:17 -0700
- To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Matitiahu Allouche <matial@il.ibm.com>
- CC: iri issue tracker <trac+iri@gamay.tools.ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-iri-3987bis@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-iri-3987bis@tools.ietf.org>, "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>
> > I'm not sure whether "running text" is the best term for this, but I am very sure > "plain text" is wrong for where we want to use it, because IRIs, markup source, > programs, and so on are in many if not most cases plain text. Running text at > least seems to come close, see e.g. the definition at > http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/running_text. > I'm pretty sure that 'running text' is too limiting as well. It there a need for a specialized term here at all? How about 'text' as the term? Even such "off-line" formats as napkins and bus sides qualify then. As in: "Where an IRI appears in text...." I notice that the term "running text" in section 1.3 appears exactly once in the document and there only provides a sort of informative explanation of UNIXML. Addison
Received on Monday, 12 March 2012 03:52:51 UTC