I did not say anything about grammar or even punctuation (in general). I have voiced a specific concern of a complete disregard of a proper capitalization. If you call it a "self-expressive style", well, it is your opinion and, of course, you are as entitled to one as everyone else. However, I highly doubt that most people would agree with your characterization of this as a "style". I welcome diversity of self-expression, but I would expect it to be in the form of writing itself (content and/or writing style) and/or visual aids (images), but not in ignoring expected traditional punctuation. BTW, the issue here includes lack of capitalization not only for the first word in a sentence, but also for the pronoun "I".

Well, I find it to pretty obviously be a self-expressive style, given the rest of its "form of writing itself (content and/or writing style) and/or visual aids (images)."

I could be wrong. Oh, well.

You might not have brought them up, but I largely (if not only ever) make the criticism regarding capitalization within contexts concerning grammar/punctuation or conveyance. And, given everything else in the article, I think it conveys pretty all right :)

This issue is not about conveyance, but rather about readability. As simple as that. So, let's agree to disagree. :-)

I'm of the opinion that there is much overlap between them. If I can have that (the opinion that is, not the concession on your part), then I accept.

I think that you and I are talking about different "readabilities". Yours implies a capability to effectively convey conceptual meaning, whereas mine (in this context) implies UX-focused - that is, purely visual - readability of the text at hand. I hope that this clarifies the source of our presumably different opinions.

I had considered both, as I think they considerably overlap (e: in this case, at least). In fact, if you want to want to completely isolate the two, I had mainly considered the UX-focused and visual aspect.

Contending over the ultimate conveyance of meaning in and of itself would have had me arguing for what we both already agree on.

Come onnnnn. It's not that bad with the grammar/punctuation, capitalization of acronyms and proper nouns, backtick highlights, and codeblocks.

If you are OK with a text being not that bad, hmm ... it is your choice. Readability is an extremely important UX concept, not to mention the accessibility in this case. For the current version of the text, people with less than great eyesight have to rely only on the (tiny) trailing dot to visually distinguish between sentences. Having proper capitalization within the context would enormously improve the text's accessibility.

As for "grammar/punctuation, capitalization of acronyms and proper nouns, backtick highlights, and codeblocks", well ... if the text would lack that, it would have been a completely unreadable wall of text.

I'm speaking of the readability being not that bad.

Accessibility arguments you're pushing here and elsewhere should have been brought up much earlier. I'm responding mainly to the "ridiculous!" outburst. (e: OK, no exclamation, and a more charitable reading will have me withdraw "outburst.")

> if the text would lack that, it would have been a completely unreadable wall of text.

Yet, in its form, it is more readable and coherent than most of what gets pushed out these days, even with proper capitalization. If anything, that is ridiculous.

With this shifting, I would like to take my leave. Be well, and good night.