"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> another thing is ban out right and remove from Moz or any
> Email/News/Webrowser the ability to create and send "Printed -Quotable
> MIME Encoding".(Even offer a $10,000 dollar reward to anyone that will
> track down and shoot anyone on the spot that uses it.)
Philip, I've been patient with you for a very long time.
No longer. This has been explained to you several times,
yet you continue to post the same retarded things as if
nobody had ever said anything. I can only conclude that
are determined to remain an ignoramus.
QUOTED-PRINTABLE DOES NOT IMPOSE ANY SORT OF
FONT DECISIONS ON THE DOCUMENT! Just because a mailer
does something stupid for no reason does not mean there is
a problem with quoted-printable. The ONLY thing
quoted-printable does is encode characters outside of the
7-bit ASCII charset so they can be sent through mail and
news servers that can't handle 8-bit (SMTP can't).
Without quoted-printable, you can't use charsets besides
US-ASCII. That means no Spanish email (uses accented
characters), no German email (same thing), no Japanese
email (uses the JIS or Shift-JIS charset), no Chinese email,
etc.
There is NOTHING in the spec for quoted-printable (actually
the spec for MIME as a whole) that requires the use of any
sort of font, or font size, or color of text with q-p messages.
The Content-Transfer-Encoding is ONLY for determining the
way the message should be sent over the wire.
> every time someone sends me such, I feel the urge to reach through the
> connection and grab the person by the neck and choke some sense into
> them.
Why don't you just--and this may seem like a wild
suggestion--use a mailer that doesn't screw up q-p
messages? I'm sorry if that concept is too difficult
for your tiny brain to comprehend.
> They send that stuff and format using Aerial 9 point and I have to
> squint (use a Magnifying glass) on 5-6 point print.
No, they do not format it at all. It's still text/plain,
and contains no formatting information. Your mailer
is screwed up.
> No amount of
> increasing the font size on my end helps (its a Graphic instead of text
> when sent that way).
No, it is not. It is text. I'd say "Do you even know what
quoted-printable is?" and "Read the spec" but I already
have many, many times and I've given up hope that you
might be capable of absorbing any information presented
to you since you were eight years old.
Which brings up the question: why are you incapable of
learning new things? Do you have a learning disability?
Mental retardation? Dropped on your head as a baby?
Stabbed in the brain during a horrible juggling accident?
What?
> And on Communicator if you forget and and attempt
> to save the post for referal to later, if you forget and not change to
> source intead of text it crashes Netscape with a type -2 error.
It is no secret that Communicator has all sorts of bugs.
I wouldn't have much of a problem with your ignorance,
really. It's the fact that you insist on posting on topics
you do not understand *as if* you were some sort of
authority, and *despite* the fact that you have been
corrected on the subject numerous times before, with
pointers to the spec that PROVE that you are wrong. It's
that sort of bull-headed stupidity that puts you on my
list of "The Most Irritating Posters on the n.p.m.*
Hierarchy", right under JTK.
I've been honoring our "cease-fire" since the whole COM
flamewar (although I'm still not sure you understand the
difference between COM, XPCOM, and ActiveX, or the
difference between "compiling as an ActiveX component"
and "supporting ActiveX components", just that you've
stopped talking about them), but I've had it.
It's my belief that somebody who is ignorant of technical
subjects and REFUSES to even *try* to learn about the
technology (the second criterion is key) has no business
being a regular poster on a technical newsgroup.
Crossposting to n.p.m.general to make sure this gets read,
and people know where I'm coming from.
