James Britt wrote:
> David Vallner wrote:
>
>
> >
> > But Dr. Dobbs'  point -is- valid, exposing someone to that by default,
> > heck, without a WYSIWYG alternative is just vile - even if it's
> > technically a very good alternative to HTML, it's an annoying We Know
> > What's Good For You Better Than You Do attitude to your users /
> > customers.
>
> It seems more like a  "We're offering an option for people who prefer
> Textile to WYSIWYG or hand-coded HTML, since no one is forced to use any
> of these tools, and choice is good" attitude.
>
> The reviewer missed this same point.

He stated a valid opinion, which you disagreed with and couldn't handle
so you spewed ad hominems and fud like "WYSIWYG is so '90s".
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/d8a6759e03c190c8?dmode=source&hl=en