Timeline for Does copy editing Unicode punctuation into posts contribute value?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
May 28, 2014 at 9:17 | comment | added | Rob Moir | And to me too, because like the majority of people here, we're sensible. But in any large website group there's a minority of idiots that need to be catered to as well. You can already see on any of the stack exchange sites where a group of people are prepared to invest 10 times as much energy into why something should be allowed to remain broken than they are into just fixing it. | |
May 26, 2014 at 11:05 | comment | added | TRiG | I don't see how "do it in text, but not in code" is particularly nuanced, @RobM. Seems fairly straightforward to me. | |
May 14, 2014 at 16:58 | comment | added | Rob Moir | The general consensus among people who care about typography is that curled apostrophes and quotation marks are easier to read and in general I agree with them totally. In the specific case of websites that display technical content that can be badly affected by someone 'correcting' quotation marks, etc. I think there's an adequate case for just say no because that's easier to enforce than anything more complex and nuanced. | |
May 13, 2014 at 12:22 | comment | added | user9517 | Perception is the only reality. | |
May 13, 2014 at 12:21 | comment | added | TRiG | That may depend on your font settings, @Iain. The general consensus among people who care about typography is that curled apostrophes and quotation marks are easier to read. | |
May 13, 2014 at 12:16 | comment | added | user9517 |
I dispute your it makes a post easier to read. Without peering at the edited text quite hard it's difficult to tell the difference. If when reading the text normally a difference isn't perceived then the two texts are the same so your statement cannot be true.
|
|
May 13, 2014 at 9:42 | comment | added | TRiG | I tend to feel the same about removing signatures, actually. To my mind, that’s also worth doing only if you’re also doing something else. I think that used to be Jeff Atwood’s policy too, but he later changed his mind and decided that signature removal was valid on its own. I think. | |
May 13, 2014 at 9:41 | history | answered | TRiG | CC BY-SA 3.0 |