Well, I don't weant to replay that messy discussion about "what do we
mena by text" so I will just re-mention a major point or two.
My problem with that is that with time, "text" has come to mean "what
I (and you, and you, and that other guy) happen to be commonly using
in our own work" regardless of the fact that these are all different.
The Eskimos have more than 30 words for the many different kinds of
"snow" but no word for "snow", just because they have so many kinds to
talk about.
We are approaching that glorious state of needing more than one word
for "text", so lets be careful to correctly name the "base text" the
we mean in the RFC.
In short, what is the advantage of being ambiguous in this regard?
Tell me about this value of ambiguity again. I seem to hav emissed it
the first time around. Best...\Stef