The Case for Plain Text

The plain text file is an open, universal, portable, and accessible format for information. There are several proprietary file formats which encapsulate text and focus on presentation within the format its self. Yet these proprietary formats do not freely allow anyone using any operating system to access textual information with a standard text editor. Plain text files are the peoples format. We gain much by embracing the text file and leaving behind the proprietary formats which are tied to big tech corporations.

This is not a protest but a realization. A manifesto perhaps as to the power of the text file. Consumers and computer users have been lulled into a slumber of believing that presentation is king, proprietary formats are best, and constant updates of office suites should be expected. While there are certainly times for the enhanced presentation of text, on the whole for communication of information, fancy fonts, images, and captions are often not necessary.

I here endeavor to share with you my dear reader, the joy I have discovered in plain text. For there is certainly a freedom in the use of plain text.

From Proprietary to Plain Text

There is a small movement to embrace plain text. Within the movement there is a community of casual writers, journalists, coders, developers, and academics who have (re)discovered the joy of plain text. There is a beauty in using plain text that is not seen on the surface. That beauty is freedom. When we write with a proprietary application such as Microsoft\'s Word, we must often reach for our mouse to select text and then press an on screen button to select an option to enhance that text so that we can make a point. Enter Markdown, a syntax which can be leveraged with a text editor and sans mouse. Markdown makes use of common keyboard symbols to enhance text. In fact this very essay has been composed in plain text with Markdown syntax in a terminal (command line) interface. When the essay is finished a simple script will convert it from Markdown to HTML and it will be ready to post to my personal website. Big deal you may be thinking. I ask you to try that with a program like Word. Of course Word can save as HTML but not without a lot of extra proprietary garbage in the backing code. This causes document bloat and formatting difficulties between editors.

Plain text is simple, light weight and easy to use. Entire books and volumes can be stored in a text file to be read later from any computer built within the last forty or fifty years. Amazingly, using plain text initially almost feels alien. Like you are doing something wrong. Since Microsoft Windows first debuted we have been told there is another and better (so we were told) way to compose text. There was WordPad and later Word. Other companies offered word processors as well. Why? Desktop publishing in my opinion. Yet no matter how pretty you make the words look, they still read the same. Your content will never be of any higher value because of the font you use. So why aren't more people using plain text if it so much better? In my opinion, marketing. If Google pushed a plain text editor tomorrow, and promoted it as the "new app of elegant simplicity getting out of your way t let you do you," I guarantee you that it would be the next hip thing. But they will never do that because word processing is a part of the pixel perfection we believe we should seek and adhere to. Even if it compromises simplicity. Desktop and cloud based GUI word processors offer lots of distraction. All of those buttons and options on the screen invite your mind to consider the options and make a decision. Over and over again. Proprietary platforms get in the way of human thought. When composing thoughts as written notes or an outline we are often using an app. That app can dictate how we structure our thoughts in written form.

Not plain text. It will let you write whatever you want and however you want. In fact when you write an outline in plain text you can choose to use any character you want as a bullet or to indicate a header. If you choose to use Markdown syntax, you will still be able to read your document easily and share it with the same ease. Yet that syntax can be converted into a variety of other formats and will retain the formatting you included as Markdown syntax. In addition, plain text files are less likely to become corrupted when compared to other file types.

A Few Files to Rule them All

In my transition to plain text I have had to consider what I really want to accomplish. Was it actually just a cool thing to try or was there more. As I write this I have been experimenting with plain text for just over a month. I have a folder on my computer(s) which has files such as todo.txt, research.txt, downloads.txt, projects.txt, journal.2022.txt, and sermon.notes.txt. Each file has a purpose. Todo is exactly what it says, things to do. Research.txt is a place to capture the ideas I want to later research. Each file having a separate function and perhaps structured differently is actually more functional for me than a proprietary format. I can edit each file from my mobile device with a standard text editor and sync it with Nextcloud for later editing from my desktop in any editor I choose. There are not any compatibility issues or formatting lost between two different applications trying to do the exact same thing. Working in plain text means I have the freedom and control over the structure and format of my files. I can choose the workflow that makes sense to me. As I write in plain text and use Markdown syntax I am able to read plain text easier because the syntax easily shows me what was intended (bullet, heading, bold, italics) by the writer (myself in this case) at the time of composition. This is called WYSIWYM (what you see is what you mean). All of my content takes up less digital space than it would in proprietary formats too.

Over time the number of files I generate will likely grow. Perhaps I\'ll choose to archive a text file after a year and start a new file. If I do, I can do that from my keyboard without a mouse as well. Thanks to the terminal user interface (TUI). I can search text files with ease whether I am looking for specific word or phrase or whatever. And while text files of considerable size can sometimes choke an operating system\'s desktop editors, it works flawlessly in the TUI; making it extremely versatile. When was the last time you opened a .docx file in the TUI. Perhaps by now you are wondering if I jumped to a different topic. I have not. However, since I use the TUI for the majority of my text editing I feel it appropriate to mention it. It is by no means required for one to get started with text files. In fact if you are using a MS Windows based machine you have the standard NotePad application. It will do the job. I recommend however, that you try Notepad++. It is far superior to NotePad as it allows for plugins and a variety of different syntax. Not to mention it has persistent tabs, meaning a tabbed interface that will open the same tabs each time you open the app.

Workflows

Text files can be run-on files. In my sermon.notes.txt file I simply add a new header to the top of the file each time I take notes. I also tend to write notes from other theological studies in this same file. I choose how I want to indicate the difference between notes on a sermon or notes in a class; by heading or date or title. Plain text being universal and easily read as a text stream, can be read by one application and sent into another. I should note here that I use the Linux Mint (based upon Ubuntu) operating system on my personal computer. Linux being a descendant of Unix^1 is excellent at leveraging text streams. Here is an example. I stated earlier I was writing this essay in plain text with Markdown syntax. When complete I will execute abook -a filename.txt which will bring the document into an interactive spellcheck and allow me to correct any misspellings. I could add to that command the following, && pandoc -o filename.html filename.txt. This command will convert the text file into an HTML file. The Markdown syntax I have been using will automatically be converted to HTML tags and be ready for upload. That may seem complicated and while outside of the scope of this essay my point is that I can leverage a single line of code to spellcheck and convert my document while retaining all of the advantages of plain text. Yes you can spell check and save as in a modern word processor. I submit that the graphical interface gets in the way and does not promote a personal workflow and comfort. If I want my text to remain as plain text for myself but would like to send an HTML or pdf version to a friend I must perform a save as, within the word processing application and hope that it can save as the desired file-type. With pandoc I can convert the same file to multiple different formats with a single line of code (which is also just text btw). It may seem trivial or even too much work to the uninitiated. However, I assure you it is not when you realize the options afforded when working with plain text. Converting my Markdown files with pandoc means I can keep the same primary file I work out of and edit, only to convert it with a single command later. As you discover yourself taking the same actions on your files, you'll be able to build better workflows and automation with scripts. Scripts are a whole wonder in themselves.

Accessibility

My workflow is easier with plain text. I can write from anywhere when I use the terminal. If I wanted to use a graphical program and proprietary format such as Libre Office or MS Word, I would need a graphical computer. That is an unwitting barrier to entry. In the terminal I can write using nano or vim and in the graphical desktop environment I can select from a variety of text editors such as xed, gedit, geany, or atom. They are all free and will allow me to edit text freely without any formatting issues. I can send the text file to a friend and they can open it in their proprietary editor, work it, and send it back (as plain text). That is open accessibility. Try doing that easily between Google Docs and Microsoft Word with relation their respective default formats. Each processor has a default format of choice and each is proprietary. Plain text, open and free, could care less about how you open it. It will read the same from a terminal, a GUI, an online office suite or an office suite from 1992.

Remember what I said about text streams earlier? I could append a text file with a line of code such as, echo \"This is a single line journal entry for today.\" \>\> filetype.txt. That will add the echoed text to the end of a text file. I do not have to open the file to add a line text to it. That can be helpful if you are working in the terminal and need to log a thought. That cannot be done with proprietary formats. You would need to open a potentially resource heavy application to add a single line of text. That's too much interaction for a few lines of text. Of course this action could be scripted as well to capture a few quick thoughts from the terminal without the need of firing up a full application.