telling, isn't it, that even the technocrats
get lost inside the "twisty little maze" of
a fellow technocrat.  quite an admission.

and speaking of a damning admission,
i see another one of my antagonists has
conceded defeat (but not said it directly).

i wondered why greg would be replying to
a request by lee for a plain-text converter,
so i dug out lee's post from my kill-folder,
and i see that he's finally looked at enough
of the p.g. snowflakes to grok the problem
presented by so many inconsistent methods.

welcome to the table for the grown-ups, lee.
you've graduated from the naive kiddie table.

so now, of course, like everyone else who has
come down this very same path before he did,
lee seeks to be rescued by the plain-text files,
the same files he's been condemning for years.
how is _that_ for your week's supply of irony?

and then, to top off this dessert with a cherry,
marcello tells lee there is only _one_ converter
that can turn a plain-text file into .html.  right.

there are ten tons of text-to-html converters,
and many of 'em are specialized for p.g. work,
including "gutenmark" and the one in guiguts.

there are also many light-markup solutions --
watch me rub lee's nose in his piddle, lurkers
-- which are open-source and will do the job,
perhaps better than the tools mentioned above.

i see that the latest version of some of these
light-markup converters output to .html5 now,
and not the outdated (x)html you might prefer,
lee, so you'll want to seek out earlier versions.

plus they're open-source, so you can always
build on one, to create the output you want...

but do not let marcello convince you that his
inferior converter is the only one you can use.

-bowerbird

p.s.  before you go too far down that road, lee,
you might wanna go back and read the archives,
where i've detailed the problems that lie there...
you can now read those posts with smarter eyes.