----- Original Message -----
From: "Laurence Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Parcelfarce
>
> Tony Firshman wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 at 09:23:47, Norman Dunbar wrote:
> > (ref:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
> >
> >
> >>Sorry guys, I may have led you up the garden path.
> >>
> >>When I mentioned 'quotes' I was referring to 'quoting of previous
text to
> >>which I am now replying' - basically, what has been said before. I
was not
> >>referring to quote marks (" or ') in Bill's text - as far as I know,
these
> >>are fine.
> >>
> >>When Bill replies to an email, the whole reply has no '>'
indents/quotes
> >>before the lines in the original message to which Bill is replying.
> >>
> >>The example below, shows my original text indented/quoted by '>' at
the
> >>start of the line. In this case, Bill's reply has come through
correctly -
> >>no misunderstanding of who said what. However, in a number of his
previous
> >>replies, there were no indent/quotes - whcih made it difficult to
follw what
> >>was original text and what was Bill's reply.
> >
> > Yep - that is what I find exactly.
> >
> > Bill is still pretty unsure as to what is happening.
> > I am pretty sure he must be sending it without indents (>) but I
don't
> > think he is convinced.
> >
> > I cannot see how _any_ mailer can strip off '>' - it just doesn't
seem
> > logical.
> >
>
>
> Erm... I use Mozilla these days. It strips off the '>' marks...
>
> ... and replaces them with neat, continuous vertical bars.
>
> I wonder. I can't be bothered to check, but does LookOut offer a
similar
> function - replace '>' with neat, continous nothing.
Yes
The choice is '>' ':' or '|' or you can untick the box and get
nowt.
my setting is '>' and my box is firmly ticked - ( did I really say
that )
BTW how is this mail
Bill
