>> Any software that can't handle a "real" URL is broken, and should be >> fixed, not accomodated. > But.. but.. if twitter supported URLs bigger than 140 characters, > it's[sic] innate nature would be irrevocably changed.
Perhaps. But, in case you hadn't noticed, this list is not twitter. I agree with the stance that meaningful URLs are preferable. Oh, and, please don't introduce spurious line breaks into them; email[%] can handle multi-hundred-character lines, and if your user agent isn't willing to leave text lines unmangled, it is critically broken (for general-purpose use, at least) and needs to be fixed or replaced. [%] Yes, I know "email" is not a single entity. SMTP certainly can, though, and so can every other even vaguely common email-carrying protocol I know of. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML [email protected] / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
