On 6/22/2012 2:40 PM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Warren Young wrote: >> On 6/22/2012 8:40 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >>> >>> wvHtml works, >>> but I don't like the output - it insists on <div>, and on &rhquo instead >>> of plain, simple ". >> >> You mean ”? >> > Yup. > >> What's wrong with that? You wanted HTML, and *any* browser will >> understand that HTML entity, even Lynx. > > Hate it. I think it's completely unnecessary. Five centuries of typographers would like to have a word with you. ” and " aren't the same thing. If the document includes curly quotes, the only correct alternative available to the HTML converter is to put out Unicode character U+201D. Now, if your converter were converting straight quotation marks to ", you might have a point. > I've done web pages, > including professional and corporate ones, and never needed it. IMO, web pages with straight quotation marks are unprofessional. :) Let the ASCII go, Mark. Just let it go. Unicode became usable over a decade ago, and became solid in most programs years ago.