Interesting points, Michael. But I'm not "missing" any of them......
////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ On 11/23/03, Michael Lewis wrote: >tass sez: > >>Hey Chris. >>I've already said that it's obvious that one can't do much about what >>happens once it gets into replies. That's the way it goes. So be it. >> > >You're not reading and comprehending. It isn't just replies that will be >munged when your perfect letter goes out. One more time: The servers your >mail is being handled by could chop your email into pieces. And as I've said, of course this happens. But not until well beyond anywhere I've seen my mail show up. I get to view my own mail on many of my clients computers, not to mention seeing it quoted in their replies. Most often times it looks just like what I typed it as. So what ever those "server" breaks are, they are far beyond what I'm referring to or have experienced previously. >What are "normal" letter length lines? 110 characters at 10-12pt type - not taking into account variations of funky fonts that range in size all over the place. But the basic Times, Courier, Arial, etc.... >Are you trying to make email look like paper mail? Absolutely! Just because we have people nowadays showing up to job interviews with emoticons in their resume's, doesn't mean that the rest of us who have learned to type, compose a personal, or business letter should just throw away those proper forms. Sure, email is far more casual. And Lord knows I have precious little control over what someone else may do with it, or how they may choose to view it at their end. But that doesn't mean for a second that I shouldn't be able to do the best I can to try to offer them something, that should they want to print it, will look like anything less than the best that I can offer them. Proper letter writing hasn't quite yet gone completely out of fashion. So if I'm going to try to hang onto a "convention", it will surely be to try to compose proper letters rather than conform to Telnet etiquette. >> [something about hitting returns] > >You don't need to hit returns. Just type, and PowerMail will take care of wrapping. Would that this were more than only partially true. PM, like a few other email clients I've tested will surely wrap it once it gets sent. But up until then, it doesn't activate or demonstrate the wrap so you can see what your document looks like BEFORE it goes. I'll hit the return key anytime, and anywhere "I" think it is appropriate to create a nicely formed letter. If the recipient has their window set so they can only see 25 characters wide, then their app will wrap accordingly or they'll have to deal with the horizontal scroll bar for their trouble. But for everyone else, it will appear just as "I" intended it to look. >As for URLs, there should be NO problem with URLs if you put them in <> >(angle brackets) -- if you cut and paste the URL, PowerMail will >automatically use angle brackets. URLs in angle brackets should be >double-clickable no matter the number of lines they take up. Some clients >may not follow this standard, but that ain't PowerMail's fault. This one is hardly an issue. Someone explained the "double click"-a-link convention for Mac which I'm not yet used to. No prob. Just need to get acclimated to that one. Never had to deal with any "brackets" before though. Just simple copy/paste - done. >>I certainly didn't mean to incite such religious fervour over some long >>forgotten > >First off, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill with this >statement (besides starting to make it a bit more personal than it has >been). I haven't seen any "religious fervour." Just a statement of how >things are; you're the one denying that it exists. OK. I admit; I did use a tad bit of exaggeration to make a point. "How things are"? Well, for about 9/10 of the world's modern computer users, how things are is you go into "preferences" find the proper tab or listing, and type in the number of characters that the program will wrap at. I've just learned today that there does exist a small minority of people that have heard of and are beating the drum soundly for, some old suggestion about how to deal with 13" monochrome, text only screens, that by today's standards is completely arbitrary. Why not 72? 85? 170? 31? There's no currently viable significance to that "78" that I can see. >I bet you might be amazed by the number of folks over >the years that did get some very ugly >email from you I can promise you surely that this HAS happened. And you can also bet that most often when it did, it's because "I" typed it that way and chose to have it look so. To do it as you suggest, should I try to share a Haiku, it should just be one long string that happens to break up wherever the app thinks it should. :-) I just got done watching 2001: A Space Odyssey again for about the 168th time. Just reminded me once again how much I DON'T want my computers doing my thinking and decision making for me. :-) I really didn't mean to get you, or anyone else hot about the collar. Initially, I just asked a simple question about a long standing feature that's widely available. From there, I've mostly just been trying to defend that question and explain that all I'm looking for is choice. I'm not looking to convert not one other soul from that which they seem to hold dear. If you like your text wrapped at 78, please, enjoy it. But why be so dead set on trying to deny me of, and convince me against my wanting to be able to send a nice letter that, should it be printed, will look like the letter I typed? When did freedom become such a hateful concept? :-) Be well, have fun, ht
