>1) why are most mail wrapped but some not? Short answer: somewhere in the process, it happens... :)
Long answer: keep reading... >2) where is the wrapping made; > a) sending mail client? > b) sending mail server? > c) receiving mail client? > d) receiving mail server? Could be all of the above, though IIRC I do not think PowerMail wraps incoming. This list/list software wraps it. Some webmail programs wrap it (I get some Yahoo e-mails that are set to 60 or such). Don't some mail clients automatically perform wrapping cleanup as can be done manually or with BBEdit/TextSoap/etc.? Haven't tried that many clients nor enough to know for sure. And here's a chunk of such discussion from last November ;) : >>>>either specify, or turn off "Word Wrap" as default - for both incoming >>>>AND outgoing mail. >>> >>>Not possible, there is no such concept in RFC 822 e-mail; see Wayne >>>Brissette for details. :) >> >>I'm not sure what you mean "not possible". Every email client I've ever >>used before has an option for settings a specific number of text characters >>before the program wraps down to the next line for new outbound >>messages. And most of them had a selection that allowed the user >>to turn this function off entirely. >>It is unbearably annoying to type specific lines of text with proper >>formatting >>just to see it come out the other end with the sentences all broken up into >>smaller sections for no good reason at all. And were not talking about >>endless strings of text without a "return" anywhere to be found. Most lines >>I type are around 110 characters maximum. >>Not to mention it plays havoc with extra long links that the email client >>can't read as wrapped to the next line. That really bites. :-) > >Since Ben thinks I'm the expert. ;-) > >Here is the story on line "wraps". The Internet spec for mail (now RFC >2822 : <http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html>), recommends 78 characters >per line. > >Here is the direct quote: > >2.1.1. Line Length Limits > > There are two limits that this standard places on the number of > characters in a line. Each line of characters MUST be no more than > 998 characters, and SHOULD be no more than 78 characters, excluding > the CRLF. > > The 998 character limit is due to limitations in many implementations > which send, receive, or store Internet Message Format messages that > simply cannot handle more than 998 characters on a line. Receiving > implementations would do well to handle an arbitrarily large number > of characters in a line for robustness sake. However, there are so > many implementations which (in compliance with the transport > requirements of [RFC2821]) do not accept messages containing more > than 1000 character including the CR and LF per line, it is important > for implementations not to create such messages. > > The more conservative 78 character recommendation is to accommodate > the many implementations of user interfaces that display these > messages which may truncate, or disastrously wrap, the display of > more than 78 characters per line, in spite of the fact that such > implementations are non-conformant to the intent of this > specification (and that of [RFC2821] if they actually cause > information to be lost). Again, even though this limitation is put on > messages, it is encumbant upon implementations which display messages > > to handle an arbitrarily large number of characters in a line > (certainly at least up to the 998 character limit) for the sake of > robustness. > > >Now, there is even more to the story than this. The relays that a message >go through (depending on the age of the equipment) may also put a hard >wrap at 78 characters. So, when you send your 110 character text it may >mean your text shows up on the other end looking very odd. There are ways >that can avoid this such as sending the message as a MIME formatted >message, but that means the message isn't pure text (which can be a good >thing at times, although personally I'm more of a purest and like my mail >as text). > >Anyhow, the bottom line is PowerMail takes the safest route and >automatically places messages at 78 characters as it is sent out. It >seems like a pain, but really it is the best route when dealing with >email, since the lost of a single word can make a huge difference in how >things interpreted. A quote from Mark Twain comes to mind -- > >The difference between the almost right word & the right word is really a >large matter--it's the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning. >- Letter to George Bainton, 10/15/1888 > >Anyhow, I realize this isn't what you and some others want, but in the >overall scheme of things it really is the safest method today. > >Wayne Chris --
