Talk:E-text

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Sderose in topic Start of one expert's edit

Untitled edit

This seems to use the term "e-text" too broadly and too narrowly at the same time. It restricts the term to ASCII text files, though it is commonly used for books in other formats (especially open formats like HTML; "html etext" gets 10,400 Google hits), and it seems at one point to sloppily use the term "etext" to refer to any ASCII text file no matter its content. Can someone cite sources that use the term in this vast sense? --Jim Henry | Talk 00:22, 11 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Concur, in particular the description of html and programs being etexts is just silly. They are text files.

Remake of the page edit

Currently the article talks both about the ETEXT format and "electronic text" as a concept. This makes the article confusing and, depending what you look for, inaccurate.

I'd split the article into two. One would be about the ETEXT format (used in old text newsletters and project Gutenberg) and the other would be for "Electronic Text" (or e-text), an article that I really don't believe is necessary but I can respect the need for in others. --eduo 16:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I agree with all the above sentiments that this needs serious attention. I don't know how to tackle it myself so have flagged it for expert attention. Nurg 06:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Start of one expert's edit edit

I agree w/ the points made above; article needs much work, esp. because of confusing several senses of its subject. I've been working in this domain since 1977, so have taken a shot at the requested "expert" edit. Doesn't feel finished, but I think it's considerably better. Comments, fixes, etc. of course welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sderose (talkcontribs) 03:45, 19 July 2012 (UTC)Reply