Timeline for What's the value of edits which replace quotation characters and apostrophes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
35 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:42 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://german.stackexchange.com/ with https://german.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jan 22, 2016 at 15:55 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 231 characters in body
|
| Jan 19, 2016 at 14:12 | vote | accept | ardila | ||
| Jan 18, 2016 at 17:06 | answer | added | Jan | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jan 17, 2016 at 9:02 | answer | added | WrzlprmftMod | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 15:13 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 149 characters in body
|
| Jan 14, 2016 at 12:56 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
adding another case of double-quote substitution
|
| Jan 13, 2016 at 11:22 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Rephrasing --a user with "no rep" could not do an edit anyway. Refocusing bit about automatically replacing characters
|
| Jan 13, 2016 at 9:39 | answer | added | user unknown | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 13:24 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Qualifying statement
|
| Jan 12, 2016 at 13:19 | comment | added | hiergiltdiestfu | What about shiftingh the lightweight discussion to chat and condensing the actual discussion points into answers, like OP suggest in his/her edit? | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 12:53 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 633 characters in body
|
| Jan 12, 2016 at 12:28 | comment | added | ardila | chuckle. whatevs, have it your way buddy :) | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 12:16 | comment | added | chirlu | the character you replaced was taken from the original edit linked. – That’s wrong. The edit doesn’t contain U+02EE, I checked. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 12:14 | comment | added | chirlu | 2. Your question mentions “tasks that a computer can do faster”, but admittedly, you only said “faster”, not “correctly”. 4. Your comment asked whether I consider it “akin to a spelling mistake”. So the “convenient” shift was done by yourself. – You don’t get an open discussion over the value of the edit by stating that these are “petty minutia”. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 12:12 | comment | added | ardila | PS: the character you replaced was taken from the original edit linked. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 12:04 | comment | added | ardila | I must say, you're taking this rather badly. And your edit to my question really shows. I'm disappointed to see the turn this question has taken, rather than an open, honest discussion about the value of the edits in question you seem to be reinforcing the view that such petty minutia is actually relevant and important somehow. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 12:00 | comment | added | ardila | @chirlu 1) They're present on major keyboard layouts and in current and extensive use in programming; I can't agree with your statement that they are "legacy". 2) That's completely outside the scope of the question, isn't it? 3) they're not on the standard US, UK, or German (DE or CH) keyboard layouts. Unicode explicitly says that "only U+0027 is present on keyboards" 4) You seem to have conveniently shifted from "spelling error" to "typographic error", which is not what the suggested duplicate is about. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:56 | history | edited | chirlu | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Replace alleged U+201D with an actual U+201D
|
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:44 | comment | added | chirlu |
1. ' (and ") are legacy characters, only included in Unicode because they were in ASCII. 2. Automatic conversion of ' doesn’t work because it is ambiguous. 3. What is or is not available depends on your settings. „‚“‘”’ are certainly available on my keyboard. 4. Yes, it’s a typographic mistake and therefore distracting.
|
|
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:29 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:26 | comment | added | ardila | @chirlu so, if I understand you correctly, you're claiming that the use of U+0022 over it's curly siblings is akin to a spelling mistake and consequently distracts the reader? | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:25 | comment | added | ardila | @chirlu Secondly, if it is preferred, the it is the job of the implementer (the text editor of the site, in this case) to follow such a recommendation as the character is not available to the user on its keyboard. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:25 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 18, 2016 at 21:04 | |||||
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:23 | comment | added | ardila | @chirlu I'm assuming you're quoting the Unicode spec? If so, it'd be lovely if you could include/link your source when challenging the accuracy of a statement. The fact that Unicode suggests U+2019 as "preferred as apostrophe" doesn't detract from its semantic difference to U+0027, and in fact is reinforced by Unicode noting that U+2019 is "context dependent", meaning that there is a semantic difference when it stands to close a statement or be used as an apostrophe. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:18 | comment | added | chirlu | Oh, by the way … the formatting change from code to italics (which seems petty) – It may seem so until you use a screen reader that will spell out the contents of a code tag. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:16 | comment | added | chirlu | From the answers: improves the average quality of the site … I feel distracted from the contents of texts containing spelling mistakes and I'm less likely to produce good contributions to them. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 11:04 | comment | added | ardila | @chirlu there are no answers to the proposed duplicate which answer this question, unless you're suggesting that "some users just have OCD" should be the answer to this as well? In which case, the question of value (which is basically the whole question) still remains. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 10:54 | comment | added | chirlu | Possible duplicate of Do we really have to be extremely critical about spelling? | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 10:52 | comment | added | chirlu | the fact that a right single quotation mark is semantically different than an apostrophe – Check your facts. U+2019 is the recommended codepoint for an apostrophe. I find reputation gained from such edits to be a misrepresentation of the user's standing a) High-rep users who have the edit privilege don’t get reputation for their edits. b) Reputation is mostly a measure of activity, not of “standing”. E.g. bad answers generally result in a net reputation win because a single upvote is more worth than four downvotes. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 10:36 | comment | added | ardila | I'm not advocating such a feature here. I'm asking what the value of such edits is and how they improve questions. If that's a feature that the community wants, it should be raised separately to find consensus. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 10:32 | comment | added | hiergiltdiestfu | Maybe this should be turned into a feature-request for auto-converting these characters. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 10:24 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Jan 12, 2016 at 10:08 | history | edited | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 91 characters in body
|
| Jan 12, 2016 at 10:02 | history | asked | ardila | CC BY-SA 3.0 |