On Sun, 29 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
I don't believe any of these standards will last terribly long, and I don't want to give any standards MORE gravitas that would allow them to keep new ones from developing.
So by that logic, Michael, I guess PG shouldn't have been so .TXTcentric for so long.
Still pretending that plain text as we are writing it here is a standard!? It just makes anyone wonder if you will ever make any ridicule progress... Why don't you try something new instead of accusing everyone else of not doing anything new???
You can't and shouldn't freeze standards absolutely, but can at least work toward graceful evolution.That's what ePub is about. It isn't perfect, but we're better with it than without it. My own idea of nirvana remain a world where most everything is available in nonDRMed ePub. If the larger publishers won't listen about encrypted books, then smaller rivals may well come along with easier-to-enjoy alternatives.
Hey, where have you been??? We've been supporting ePub. Don't you ever look before you leap?
Anyway, I have a choice between doing my work and wasting time replying to
Well, I certainly agree that you are wasting your time with such comments. If you can't come up with something better, it's time to call it a waste.
some rather surrealistic misstatements here. I choose the former. But meanwhile I'm pleased that PG is offering ePub, which can, yes, slug it out which the other formats in the best Darwinian tradition.
Ah, so. . .on the one hand you deny ePub, on the other it is there. Ever consider trying consistency? Your normally disruptive behaviors haven't changed over the years. Too bad maturity doesn't always come with age. . . . I hope you are serious about stopping wasting time, yours and ours.