Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Saturday, 2/8/2003, 12:31 AM Hi Douglas, On Sat, 08 Feb 2003, at 00:13:25 [GMT -0600] (which was 10:13 PM where I live) you wrote about: 'Looks like html makes to the BAT' DH The last version of TB! to exclude html creation may well become a classic. And most likely the only one used in this house. If I wanted HTMLBLOAT I would have stayed with eudora. -- Your communication is greatly appreciated, Paul I said 'No gnu taxes!' Do you see any gnus being taxed? Powered by The Bat! v1.63 Beta/5 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Douglas, On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 at 00:13:25[GMT -0600](which was 06:13 where I live) you wrote: That is not true. Here's how I do it (it's very simple): 1).- The Mail Dispatcher will pull down as many lines as you set it for (I download 25). 2).- Selective Download will look for the strings you set for it in any of those downloaded lines. Therefore - if you include html in your list of strings to be excluded, all html mail directed your way will wind up with the Receive box unchecked. Does that really do what I was asking? I want the message downloaded but to have the HTML attachment removed _after_ downloading. If I read your message correctly _all_ messages with HTML attachments will not be downloaded. No good I'm afraid as far too many people send important text messages with HTML. Whilst looking very useful I would rather have all messages in my inbox. For instance I use the excellent Spampal for spam and I wish someone could design a similar HTMLpal for a similar purpose:-) Just in case of the very rare (but increasingly possible) chance that an important message should not have a separate HTML attachment I wouldn't want to miss it. -- Best regards, Richard | Using The Bat! 1.63 Beta/6 SpamPal | Windows 2000 (build 2195), version 5.0 Service Pack 3 | and using the best browser: Opera7 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
On Friday, February 7, 2003, 11:17 AM, you wrote: Looks like html editing has finally made it to the BAT. I'm sure it will be greeted with delight or scorn depending on your preference. JA It's also very beta, and being worked on ;) So unless you love cutting JA edge code, I'd suggest holding back for a bit ;) what I'm really interested in is the schedular, but like you said, I'll wait for a release or two.. Beta 6 added way too many new features ( and bugs:) to be stable ( IMHO ). -- Paul Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/5 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
On Friday, February 7, 2003, 12:32 PM, you wrote: RW I have my background as light grey so your message looks like a lot of RW white rectangles with different coloured text. Another reason against RW it :-) I must have missed that. I tried changing the colors, but it only changed the EDITOR windows. in the browse ticker window, you can change your default background/foreground colors??? right now I am editing this with a wonderful dark blue background, with light grey text, I used this in my old UNIX invironment for years:) -- Paul Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/5 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Douglas, On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 at 05:23:49[GMT -0600](which was 11:23 where I live) you wrote: Not exactly. What happens is: All messages containing the string html in the first 25 lines will be de-selected for downloading by the Mail Dispatcher. That is, if you want, you can let them be eliminated automatically w/o downloading them. No, I want to download them because I can still read most of them in the text version. I just want the ability to remove the HTML attachment automatically instead of manually. Incidentally, most of the spam that shows up on my Mail Dispatcher is html, and most of the html I find there is spam. Spampal takes care of that beautifully. This makes it hard for me to accept html as a valid option (aside from the bloat and degrading of original TB! cultural pardigm. TB! might as well add a website creator and throw the desires of the purists (mostly long term TB! users) out the window. Perhaps a coffee maker could be added also. I agree wholeheartedly but progress (!) in whatever form is inevitable and we have to accept it but, hopefully, with some compromises. As long as I can read most messages in plain text then I'm happy and any other HTML only messages will be binned. -- Best regards, Richard | Using The Bat! 1.63 Beta/6 SpamPal | Windows 2000 (build 2195), version 5.0 Service Pack 3 | and using the best browser: Opera7 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
On Saturday, February 8, 2003, 12:15:03 AM, Tim ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I am really happy about it. I am not one of those purists. MB One does not have to be a purist to have difficulty reading html MB messages in an e-mail client. :) True. But that's the fault of the person writing the message, not the tool used to write it. This is a purist view in its own way, though. it is idealistic to expect everyone to use their tools properly, seeing as the large majority of internet users have zero clue as to what HTML even is, let alone where it is suitable and where it isn't, or what the difference is between a readable and unreadable HTML. What follows is that tools should make it easy for everyone to generate proper, correct, readable messages, and make it hard to do otherwise. IMO, adding HTML capability to TB is wrong, because it will increase the volume of unreadable HTML email I receive, and it will perpetuate the ignorance of those who start ignorant (we all were, at some point in our lives, ignorant of these issues). rant This is going to sound harsh, but if this is what TB's developers are spending their time and effort on, I'm beginning to regret having registered the program. A decision to register is not only based on current state of an application, but often also on the expectation of further development. I've seen TB develop over the years and felt reasonably safe the program was developing into a powerful, reliable, and standard-compliant tool. HTML email is not compliant with standards, and it is suboptimal in many respects (see for example http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml). Here's one *very* non-plussed TB user. /rant .marek jedlinski -- No ads, no nags freeware: http://keynote.prv.pl (KeyNote, PhoneDeck, KookieJar, Oubliette) My operat~1 system unders~1 long filena~1 , does yours? Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
On Friday, February 07, 2003 Kenneth S. Rhee stated: KSR Here is my first message using the html editor. In the infamous words of the housewife upon seeing a mouse .. EK That hurt my eyes big time .. GIMME ASCII! :-) Later \\'olffe Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Signature Cut line (was: Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT)
On Friday, February 07, 2003 Mary Bull stated: JH same here :-) and I think you missed the space after the two dashes? MB The way to be sure one gets this space in, is: MB 1) Hit the enter or return key after one's last line of text. MB 2) Type -- MB 3) Hit the space bar (that will put the space in) MB 4) Hit the enter or return key once more MB 5) Type one's signature MB To check: Place the cursor at the far left (beginning) of the first MB line of text in the signature. Hit the backspace key. It should return MB only to the space--leaving a space: like this -- between it and the MB two dashes. If you do this check, be sure to hit the enter (return) MB key again, to be sure the space is maintained, before sending your MB message. :) Mayhaps this is a bug in M$'s cutpaste, but I was hit with complaints about missing the space after the dash dash as well. I had developed my sig in one of the templates and copied it, then pasted it in the other templates. Come to find out it was fine in the original .. but I had to manually put the space back on the copies. Come to think of it, I need to fix this reply template -- Just food for thought \\' Running TB! version 1.63 Beta/6 under Windows 2000 5.0 on a 500mhz P-III with 512mb Ram Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
On Friday, February 07, 2003 Mary Bull stated: MB ... Also, are you going to educate everyone to use MB html tastefully? Once when I was still having to use Outlook Express, MB a newbie on another list sent me a grateful reply privately, three MB pages on OE stationery, shocking pink background, with red dancing MB hearts, and deeper pink roses that did some kind of motion, and text MB in a white, 10 pt. font. A perfect example of bloat! Mary, how big was this email? -- HTML has its place .. but not in my email \\' Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Signature Cut line (was: Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT)
Hello Wolffe! On Saturday, February 08, 2003, 6:45 PM, you wrote: JH ... and I think you missed the space after the two dashes? I addressed this problem because it took me two months to understand what people were telling me about how to do it. I did not get their language. So I thought maybe my wording might help--in case there might be another living soul out there whose brain works like mine. :) MB The way to be sure one gets this space in, is: MB 1) Hit the enter or return key after one's last line of text. MB 2) Type -- MB 3) Hit the space bar (that will put the space in) MB 4) Hit the enter or return key once more MB 5) Type one's signature MB To check: Place the cursor at the far left (beginning) of the first MB line of text in the signature. Hit the backspace key. It should return MB only to the space--leaving a space: like this -- between it and the MB two dashes. If you do this check, be sure to hit the enter (return) MB key again, to be sure the space is maintained, before sending your MB message. :) W Mayhaps this is a bug in M$'s cutpaste, but I was hit with W complaints about missing the space after the dash dash as well. I W had developed my sig in one of the templates and copied it, then W pasted it in the other templates. Come to find out it was fine in W the original .. but I had to manually put the space back on the W copies. Okay. So there might be the difficulty, also. I know everyone wants to make it easier for people to trim their quotes when replying, and the cut line is one way to help. For people who sign with PGP, of course, it doesn't work, unless someone has told the recipient (and reply-er) about the magic template to take care of that, also. :) W Come to think of it, I need to fix this reply template Some of mine are messed up again, too. Half the time I end up typing the cut line in manually. :) Fraught with peril, that practice!! :) -- Best regards, Mary The Bat! 1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Wolffe! On Saturday, February 08, 2003, 6:51 PM, you wrote: MB ... three pages on OE stationery, ... W A perfect example of bloat! Mary, how big was this email? W, I realize you are reading this thread some time after it was written, and I am coming to your reply hours behind that. But I would feel more comfortable continuing the discussion on tbot. There are people writing to tbudl who are trying to get present problems solved. There is a good discussion of html going on at tbot today. :) I don't remember the size of that old eye-straining OE e-mail--about 30,000 bytes, I would guess. :) -- Best regards, Mary The Bat! 1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Kenneth S. Rhee, On or about Friday, February 07, 2003 at 09:26:17GMT -0500 (which was 9:26 AM in the tropics where I live) Kenneth S. Rhee confirmed: KSR Looks like html editing has finally made it to the BAT. KSR I'm sure it will be greeted with delight or scorn depending KSR on your preference. VOTE SCORN! /VOTE -- Warmest tropical wishes, Spike I love you, you love me, don'tcha want a frontal lobotomy? -- /\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign - Against HTML Mail \ / If it aint a webpage it shouldn't be HTML. XSay NO! to bloatmail - ban HTML mail! / \ Ask Spikey, he hates everything (HTML). -- Using TheBat! v1.61 hamstrung by Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 -- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday, February 07, 2003, Kenneth S. Rhee wrote... Looks like html editing has finally made it to the BAT. I'm sure it will be greeted with delight or scorn depending on your preference. It's also very beta, and being worked on ;) So unless you love cutting edge code, I'd suggest holding back for a bit ;) - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQA/AwUBPkPcOiuD6BT4/R9zEQJYAgCgi+I+xDroWCgIGeG2WWlLvAfapugAoOuF XciAKf9WAXuL4FUuXfThi9rH =JKPC -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
On Friday, February 7, 2003, 4:54:54 PM, Kenneth S. Rhee wrote: Here is my first message using the html editor. Don't the list rules prohibit the posting of HTML messages. :-) Whilst there are arguments both ways on whether or not TB should allow the writing of HTML messages, I value the HTML-free nature of this list! Julian -- Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Julian, On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 17:09:29 + GMT (08/02/03, 00:09 +0700 GMT), Julian Beach (Lists) wrote: Whilst there are arguments both ways on whether or not TB should allow the writing of HTML messages, I value the HTML-free nature of this list! ACK. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. OK, so what's the speed of dark? Message reply created with The Bat! 1.63 Beta/5 under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday, February 07, 2003, Spike wrote...
KSR span.0 {FONT-FAMILY:'arial' ; FONT-SIZE:12 ; COLOR:#00 ; }
KSR One thing I like it is it's not obtrusive, and I can turn it on
KSR or off at will.
Unobtrusive?? How can I remove the above gibberish from showing up
in my text window??
Back to the drawing board!
Not at all... it was a bug that has already been fixed. You're just
using an older version that has that bug in it.
- --
Jonathan Angliss
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
iQA/AwUBPkPspyuD6BT4/R9zEQJxfwCg/3riX87JvJJkahDQCCG8FwLuWOsAnA1L
V0A2WVgpS/pzhLkzeBiLpDle
=cu74
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hi Kenneth, on Fri, 7 Feb 2003 11:54:54 -0500GMT (07.02.03, 17:54 +0100GMT here), you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : KSR Hello Jurgen, I want to second Julian. Leave The Bat!'s newly learnt features to TBBETA and keep TBUDL HTML-free. :-) -- Cheers Peter If you ate pasta and antipasta, would you still be hungry? Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Kenneth, On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 at 11:54:54[GMT -0500](which was 16:54 where I live) you wrote: One thing I like it is it's not obtrusive, and I can turn it on or off at will. I know people like it but I wish there was an option to strip all HTML mail instead of having to delete it manually. I know this has been discussed recently and it's not possible at the moment. Here is my first message using the html editor. I have my background as light grey so your message looks like a lot of white rectangles with different coloured text. Another reason against it :-) -- Best regards, Richard | Using The Bat! 1.63 Beta/6 SpamPal | Windows 2000 (build 2195), version 5.0 Service Pack 3 | and using the best browser: Opera7 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Peter, @7-Feb-2003, 18:26 +0100 (17:26 UK time) Peter Meyns [PM] in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: KSR Hello Jurgen, PM I want to second Julian. Leave The Bat!'s newly learnt features PM to TBBETA and keep TBUDL HTML-free. :-) Okay. Here we go. moderator Note: This moderator's interjection is a note to all readers and not just to the person being replied to, even if their post may have instigated this reply. Please don't feel singled out Peter. Here's the thing: Right now, HTML mail is still only in the Beta version. The rule has to be that we test it only on TBBETA. Now. I have to think a little more soberly about the future (not an easy task of a Friday evening already partly mis-spent on home-made wine). Once 1.63 is out in-the-wild, then I think it's going to be a different matter. The TBUDL is the primary list for end-user and newbie support issues. The current rules (quite rightly IMHO) are against the use of HTML for posting. If a newbie needs help with the HTML writing side of TB then they will expect to be able to chat about it / using it / right here. I'm clearly going to have to talk this over with my co-moderators and come to a ruling on the topic, but until then I guess it should remain as no HTML on this list. The beta list is another matter for now and there will have to be a relaxing of the rules - at least while we test the new facilities. /moderator - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.63 Beta/6 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1rc1-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE+RBfmOeQkq5KdzaARArn0AJ9PPZxkmE0BYLanXk2wzzlXQA7RdACfaLzp Uqr/Gl/PdXwXwboIlwVdmCo= =kdaT -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Julian Beach (Lists) [JB] wrote:'
Here is my first message using the html editor.
JB Don't the list rules prohibit the posting of HTML messages. :-)
moderator
Indeed it does.
An HTML editor is currently being beta tested. However, this doesn't
mean that HTML messages are now allowed on the list.
/moderator
- --
-=] allie_M [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.63 Beta/6 ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: My Public Keys - http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html
iD8DBQE+RCqvV8nrYCsHF+IRAgo5AKDaxGhg4GPIXmjiCWBKztwErE3c6gCgsoxm
hfJ1nCX0Bjw98W5IiPbbbwM=
=TZHy
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Kenneth!
On Friday, February 07, 2003, 10:54 AM, you wrote:
K span {BACKGROUND-COLOR:#FF ; }
K span.0 {FONT-FAMILY:'arial' ; FONT-SIZE:12 ; COLOR:#00 ; }
K span.1 {FONT-FAMILY:'arial' ; FONT-SIZE:12 ; COLOR:#FF ; }
K span.2 {FONT-FAMILY:'courier new' ; FONT-SIZE:12 ; COLOR:#80 ; }
K span.3 {FONT-FAMILY:'times new roman' ; FONT-SIZE:18 ; COLOR:#00 ; }Hello
Jurgen,
K One thing I like it is it's not obtrusive, and I can turn it on or off at will.
I truly dislike this! I had to put your message into the Reply text
editor in order to read it.
The colors are garish--on my screen--and hurt my eyes. The type is
only half as large as the Courier New that I have set up to read and
compose my messages in plain text.
I cannot change an html message on my machine for easier reading, as I
can a plain text message.
I am 75 years old, and my vision is not what it was at 20. But one
thing I do like about The Bat! and tbudl and tbot is that neither the
e-mail client nor the lists are age-discriminatory. At least, not so
far. :)
snip
JH Friday, February 7, 2003, 5:31:50 PM, you wrote:
KSR Looks like html editing has finally made it to the BAT.
KSR I'm sure it will be greeted with delight or scorn
KSR depending on your preference.
I greet it with a groan of dread. And I am not smiling.
I am really happy about it. I am not one of those purists.
One does not have to be a purist to have difficulty reading html
messages in an e-mail client. :)
JH same here :-) and I think you missed the space after the two dashes?
The way to be sure one gets this space in, is:
1) Hit the enter or return key after one's last line of text.
2) Type --
3) Hit the space bar (that will put the space in)
4) Hit the enter or return key once more
5) Type one's signature
To check: Place the cursor at the far left (beginning) of the first
line of text in the signature. Hit the backspace key. It should return
only to the space--leaving a space: like this -- between it and the
two dashes. If you do this check, be sure to hit the enter (return)
key again, to be sure the space is maintained, before sending your
message. :)
--
Best regards,
Mary
The Bat! 1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
On Saturday, 8 February 2003, Kenneth S. Rhee wrote: KSR Looks like html editing has finally made it to the BAT. This is great news. I was just starting to look for an alternative mailer that would let me create HTML mail. Any idea how long before general release? -- Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
On Saturday, 8 February 2003, Mary Bull wrote: MB I truly dislike this! I had to put your message into the Reply text MB editor in order to read it. Why not just view the plain text version if you don't like the HTML version? The formatting junk at the beginning is annoying, but bearable. MB The colors are garish--on my screen--and hurt my eyes. The type is MB only half as large as the Courier New that I have set up to read MB and compose my messages in plain text. That's not the fault of HTML -- it's the fault of the person who chose that formatting for the message. MB I cannot change an html message on my machine for easier reading, MB as I can a plain text message. True, although you can view the plain text version. It would be great if The Bat! had a user-defined style sheet that could override the embedded styles (like Opera). MB I greet it with a groan of dread. And I am not smiling. Why? Your problem was with reading something somebody else sent. Don't you have the same problems with emails sent by Outlook Express users, or Eudora users, or users of most other email software? why is giving us the option to use HTML formatting so bad when most of the internet world already have that option? I am really happy about it. I am not one of those purists. MB One does not have to be a purist to have difficulty reading html MB messages in an e-mail client. :) True. But that's the fault of the person writing the message, not the tool used to write it. And you must have the same difficulty even now, when The Bat! does not compose HTML messages, unless everyone who writes to you uses The Bat!. -- Tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
How do I join the BetaBat list ? I have the the latest beta version and I noticed that several of my folders are missing... I switch back to the original version and they are there. -- Best Regards, ~John - - - Kenneth S. Rhee wrote - - - Friday, February 7, 2003, 5:51:59 PM, you wrote: MB I truly dislike this! I had to put your message into the Reply text MB editor in order to read it. MB The colors are garish--on my screen--and hurt my eyes. The type is MB only half as large as the Courier New that I have set up to read and MB compose my messages in plain text. MB I cannot change an html message on my machine for easier reading, as I MB can a plain text message. MB I am 75 years old, and my vision is not what it was at 20. But one MB thing I do like about The Bat! and tbudl and tbot is that neither the MB e-mail client nor the lists are age-discriminatory. At least, not so MB far. :) I am sorry. I should have sent the message to the beta forum. If you are running the latest beta, there is a way to format the html viewer/editor. As far as I can tell, it came through fine in my BAT (1.63 beta 6). - - - End of Kenneth S. Rhee's message - - - Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
~john [j] wrote:'
j How do I join the BetaBat list ?
You can use the following URL:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=subscribe
- --
-=] allie_M [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.63 Beta/6 ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: My Public Keys - http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html
iD8DBQE+REbOV8nrYCsHF+IRAhZxAJ9QLBxXrXbpKbGhsCVeKBUDBabjWACg2VI6
ZQGCi/TRctD2DpGf5CWZ+PU=
=f/Iv
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Tim! On Friday, February 07, 2003, 5:15 PM, you wrote: MB I truly dislike this! [The pink html message sent by Kenneth S. MB Rhee to tbudl today.] I had to put your message [replying to MB Kenneth] into the Reply text editor in order to read it. I appreciate your reply, Tim, but I think we had better move this discussion to tbot. As I understood the last messages from the moderators, how to use html is an acceptable topic now on tbudl, but not whether or not it is desirable in The Bat! T Why not just view the plain text version if you don't like the HTML T version? The formatting junk at the beginning is annoying, but T bearable. I thought I made clear, in my Post, that the only way I can view the plain text version is to bring it up in the Reply text editor, after I have put the message on my screen in its html mode. So, my eyes are assaulted! :) MB The colors are garish--on my screen--and hurt my eyes. The type is MB only half as large as the Courier New that I have set up to read MB and compose my messages in plain text. T That's not the fault of HTML -- it's the fault of the person who chose T that formatting for the message. Ah. And that was Kenneth, to whom I replied. :) MB I cannot change an html message on my machine for easier reading, MB as I can a plain text message. T True, although you can view the plain text version. It would be great T if The Bat! had a user-defined style sheet that could override the T embedded styles (like Opera). I'm with you there! Let's send it to the Wish List. :) MB I greet it with a groan of dread. And I am not smiling. T Why? Your problem was with reading something somebody else sent And, I thought, since he sent it to the List, that he sent it expecting me to read it and enjoy reading it. I did not enjoy it. And I expressed my feelings to him. T Don't you have the same problems with emails sent by Outlook T Express users, or Eudora users, or users of most other email T software? why is giving us the option to use HTML formatting so bad T when most of the internet world already have that option? This is exactly why I am not using Outlook Express and Eudora. And I did use them in the past, before I found The Bat! I do have mails come in from those using OE etc., who have sent their messages in html. These appear as attachments, and I can decide how important to me the message may be--if it's from someone really important to me, I do view it. And ask them to send plain text, next time. Mostly I delete them. For some reason, Kenneth's message came onto my screen without my clicking on his attachment symbol. It was a little bit of a shock--since it was from a tbudl Poster. I am really happy about it. I am not one of those purists. MB One does not have to be a purist to have difficulty reading html MB messages in an e-mail client. :) T True. But that's the fault of the person writing the message, not the T tool used to write it. And you must have the same difficulty even now, T when The Bat! does not compose HTML messages, unless everyone who T writes to you uses The Bat!. See my comments above. Also, are you going to educate everyone to use html tastefully? Once when I was still having to use Outlook Express, a newbie on another list sent me a grateful reply privately, three pages on OE stationery, shocking pink background, with red dancing hearts, and deeper pink roses that did some kind of motion, and text in a white, 10 pt. font. Can I expect that next from tbudl posters? If not, what kind of education will prevent it, and the loud accompanying music, too? Please reply, if you do reply to this Post, on tbot. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Best regards, Mary The Bat! 1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Kenneth! On Friday, February 07, 2003, 5:26 PM, you wrote: snip MB I cannot change an html message on my machine for easier reading, MB as I can a plain text message. MB I am 75 years old, and my vision is not what it was at 20. ... K I am sorry. ... Thank you. Apology accepted. :) K ... I should have sent the message to the beta forum. If you are K running the latest beta, there is a way to format the html K viewer/editor. Since I am still pretty much a newbie, I think I am better off without beta versions. :) K As far as I can tell, it came through fine in my BAT (1.63 beta 6). I do not ever want to see neon-bright colors and motion (of course, you didn't put motion, but that is possible, as I understand it, with html) on my screen. It gives me a headache. I do appreciate your sparing me this in the future. Let's talk about this on tbot, if you have more to say? [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Best regards, Mary The Bat! 1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Looks like html makes to the BAT
Hello Kenneth! On Friday, February 07, 2003, 6:12 PM, you wrote, in response to my reply accepting your apology to me for the html message you had sent to tbudl: MB I do not ever want to see neon-bright colors ... on my screen. MB ... It gives me a headache. ... K Just FYI, K The text message was simply red, bold and italicized Arial 10 pt K font. Nothing fancy or sophisticated. That's the thing about html. It often appears different on the recipient's screen from what it was on the sender's screen. You have no way to check out what my particular settings are going to make of it. :) So, your intentions were good, but the result was neon-pink, about 8 pt., wiggly (not really, but felt that way--I guess it was the italics) and disastrous!! Do you not think we are going to get a big fat trout (reprimand from the moderators) pretty soon? Let's move this to tbot (unless you are not subscribed there). If you are not, I encourage you to look in your Welcome message, and subscribe. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Best regards, Mary The Bat! 1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
