Just to add my little push to the direction Richmail currently seems
to be taking:
I would find some simple way to indicate the structure of a document
much more useful than some way to transmit the formatting. It's
somewhat like sending source instead of binaries. :-)
The structure may then be interpreted and formatted on a local,
user-by-user, or adapted-to-equipment basis.
Take this more as an example than an proposal:
Keyword Possible interpretation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
%Header1( ... ) bigger & bold, centered
%Header2( ... ) bigger, centered
%Header3( ... ) bold
%Quote( ... ) italic, left and right indent
%Stress( ... ) bold or underlined (an important word)
%Foreign( ... ) italic (a word or phrase in a foreign language,
a reference to a program langage token
in plain text, etc..)
%Code( ... ) Always use fixed-width font. (Program code examples)
%ListItem( ... ) Bullet list item.
%Header2(Some examples of usage:)
Remember that the back-up tape %Stress(has) to be removed before boot.
This is what we call %Foreign(Bysen), a creature from old folk tales.
It is very har do use %Foreign(signal%(%)) for any kind of proper
process communikation...
And then I run the counter backwards, something like this:
%Code(
for %(i = MAXSIZE; i >= 0 ; i--%) {
do_it_right%(i%);
}
)
I think this makes more sense than simply indicating this or that
word should be bold or italic.
What do you think? Is it possible to find a small set of around a dozen
keywords that catches 90% of what the users want?
/mats
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_
Mats Ohrman Scandinavian System Support AB E-mail:
matoh(_at_)sssab(_dot_)se
Box 535 _ Telephone: +46 13 11 16 60
581 06 Linkoping, Sweden Telefax: +46 13 11 51 93