On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:01:00 +1300 Christopher Sawtell wrote: > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:56, Nick Rout wrote:
[snip discussion about line lengths in email] > Nick: You shouldn't have to be sorry. All modern mail user agents wrap lines. Nice of you to come to my defence, but I disagree! Actually it depends whether you are talking about the compose window or the reading window. AFAICT the compose window should insert newlines (of whatever combination of control characters) in the mail (traditionally at 72 characters to allow for tidy lines once citation marks have been added). One of the reasons this is all one paragraph is to test whether I now have it right. Wrapping by the viewer window is a completely separate thing. > > Derick: Get yourself a decent MUA. Pine is old and not suitable for today's > e-mail environment. > And leave PINE alone, I thought you were an advocate of choice, or is NDA-land warping you :-) By the way I believe the style used in this email exemplifies a style that seems to be regarded, rightly or wrongly, as the more acceptable of various practices, particularly in "geek" or technical circles viz: 1. I snipped the top part of the conversation that does not need to be preserved to make sense of this email, and substituted a line summarising the conversation to there. 2. I posted my replies inline at the point where the comment was relevant. I believe that top posting should be limited to situations where you want to make an overall comment to a post in its entirety, particularly a long one. Unfortunately I am the first to admit I do not always follow the rules. > -- > C. S. > > See how it looks. Bottom posting is the natural way of doing it. -- Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
