I'm ready to stop. You are not talking to me. You say I am not talking to you. Who has more practice? Who started the non-conversation? If you have a point to make, you missed. Take better aim and try again, or give it up. On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:

michael-

i said it before, and i'll say it again.  but i'm tired of repeating it.

i'm on _your_ side.  i've got your back.

lately, you're beginning to make as little sense as jon noring used to, arguing "against" me when you don't even know what you're saying...

i'm really going to have to stop talking to you.  it's a waste of time.

***

...

   Then say it is an OPTION. . . . ...    /then say OPTION!!!

i don't know how to say it any more clearly than i already have...

the whole point is that some people _want_ pagination, and i said "why not give it to them?"  what is that, if it's not an _option?_

and as for the people who don't want to be bothered with pagination, i've said "why not give them what they want as well?"  as _their_ option.

i've even devised a format, and written the code, that will allow _both_ parties to get what they want.  precisely because i believe in _options_.

does p.g. offer people who want pagination a way for them to get it? no, it doesn't.  and yet you yabber on about "options", like you owned the concept or something.  why don't you start giving people options?

you even go on to say "love it" when lee passey offers up a convoluted and cockamamie scheme with complex and unnecessary .html coding.

does project gutenberg have a page on its website that will _unwrap_ an e-text?  no, it doesn't.  but i have a page on my site that'll do that...

...

   However, if references were made to PHRASES and NOT PAGES,    this would work EVER SO MUCH BETTER!!!!!!!

lay off the exclamation points, old man.  they're making you punch drunk.

making references to "phrases" might work if we did it from here on out, but there'd still be millions and millions of references to pagenumbers in the corpus that represents our cultural heritage.  i know you to be a strong supporter of that cultural heritage, so i know you can't mean what you appear to be implying here, which is that we lose all those references.

***

as for the rest of your reply, it just degenerates into meaninglessness...

i have made my point, for the people who care to understand it, so i will opt out of stupid aspects of this conversation for the rest of the thread.

-bowerbird