Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Apr 1, 9:21 am, Ray_Net  wrote:

Terry R. wrote:

The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:48:11 PM, and on a whim,
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:

On Mar 31, 7:11 pm, "Terry R."  wrote:

The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:03:07 PM, and on a whim,
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:

On Mar 31, 4:54 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
message source, the blank line is there (although the message
has been
converted totext).
However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent
it to
myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank
line
is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message
and
it becomes very hard to read.
OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
X-Mozilla-
Keys:
Message-ID: [omitted]
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
From: [omitted]
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:[omitted]
Subject: This Week...
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j
WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j

Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
I do your test.
It seems that only you have a problem ...
My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
Subject: TEST CONVERSION
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

You gottext, not HTML

/j

You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
In the case you furnishedThe inputtextin plaintext, so the mail
is also plaintext. All is NORMAL.
You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your inputtextas
test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.
So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.
SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an
HTMLtext.
AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML
format.

I can't furnish in HTML, SM always converts it to plaintext.  and I
never said I wanted to force anyone to do anything (except for certain
readers to read the whole thread and take a request seriously) 8-}

Like I mentioned, if you insert a sig that has just one HTML element,
say a specific color or something of that sort, then it would be sent in
HTML.  Or use the Insert HTML and insert a horizontal line at the top or
bottom (i.e.  ). That will force it to be sent in HTML.
Terry R.
--

Thanks Terry - I appreciate it, and I know many people (from postings
elsewhere) use this workaround.  I just thought that if there were so
many people working around something, it might make sense to request a
fix.
best regards
/j

I can see how it is confusing, although I agree with the method.  Most
of us write a message and send it off.  I compose in HTML and I have a
serif font as my default.  I have my settings set to send in HTML to
specific people in my AB, and because my sig file is an HTML file, it's
sent that way.
But if I don't have any specific HTML elements and I am composing in
HTML mode, TB is taking the privilege to send the message as it sees
fit, since there aren't any HTML elements included.
I would agree that if the user has the settings to compose in HTML, it
should be sent in HTML, EVEN if there is only a font setting as the
default.
Terry R.

How can i (as you said) compose in HTML if there is NOTHING in HTML ?
If there is nothing in HTML, SM have the right to send it in plaintext 
because it's a plain-texttext.

If you want that we try your problem ...tell us step by step how to get
your "the blank line is MISSING. " symptom.


There isn't "nothing" in HTML.  There is font sele

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Terry R.]

The date and time was Wednesday, April 01, 2009 6:21:36 AM, and on a 
whim, Ray_Net pounded out on the keyboard:


I can see how it is confusing, although I agree with the method.  Most 
of us write a message and send it off.  I compose in HTML and I have a 
serif font as my default.  I have my settings set to send in HTML to 
specific people in my AB, and because my sig file is an HTML file, it's 
sent that way.


But if I don't have any specific HTML elements and I am composing in 
HTML mode, TB is taking the privilege to send the message as it sees 
fit, since there aren't any HTML elements included.


I would agree that if the user has the settings to compose in HTML, it 
should be sent in HTML, EVEN if there is only a font setting as the 
default.



Terry R.

How can i (as you said) compose in HTML if there is NOTHING in HTML ?
If there is nothing in HTML, SM have the right to send it in plain 
text because it's a plain-text text.




Simple. You have two ways to compose messages, in Plain Text or HTML. 
Read what I said about the rest.  And I disagree.  A client doesn't have 
the RIGHT to send it plain text when the user is in the HTML mode 
composing a message.  If they wanted to send in PT, they would COMPOSE 
in PT.



If you want that we try your problem ...tell us step by step how to get
your "the blank line is MISSING. " symptom.


It's not my problem.



Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Apr 1, 9:21 am, Ray_Net  wrote:
> Terry R. wrote:
> > The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:48:11 PM, and on a whim,
> > googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:
>
> >> On Mar 31, 7:11 pm, "Terry R."  wrote:
> >>> The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:03:07 PM, and on a whim,
> >>> googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>  On Mar 31, 4:54 pm, Ray_Net 
>  wrote:
> > googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> >> On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
> >> wrote:
> >>> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
>  Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
>  composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
>  that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
>  message source, the blank line is there (although the message
>  has been
>  converted totext).
>  However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent
>  it to
>  myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank
>  line
>  is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message
>  and
>  it becomes very hard to read.
>  OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
>  From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
>  X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
>  X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
>  X-Mozilla-
>  Keys:
>  Message-ID: [omitted]
>  Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
>  From: [omitted]
>  User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
>  1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
>  MIME-Version: 1.0
>  To:[omitted]
>  Subject: This Week...
>  Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>  OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
>  I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
>  Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
>  this week)
>  If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
>  ASAP.
>  Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
>  /j
>  WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
>  OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
>  I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
>  Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
>  this week)
>  If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
>  ASAP.
>  Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
>  /j
> >>> Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
> >>> I do your test.
> >>> It seems that only you have a problem ...
> >>> My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
> >>> Subject: TEST CONVERSION
> >>> Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >>> X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
> >>> X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
> >>> OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
> >>> I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
> >>> Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> >>> this week)
> >>> If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> >>> ASAP.
> >>> Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
> >> You gottext, not HTML
> >> 
> >> /j
> > You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
> > In the case you furnishedThe inputtextin plaintext, so the mail
> > is also plaintext. All is NORMAL.
> > You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your inputtextas
> > test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.
> > So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.
> > SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
> > If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an
> > HTMLtext.
> > AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML
> > format.
>  I can't furnish in HTML, SM always converts it to plaintext.  and I
>  never said I wanted to force anyone to do anything (except for certain
>  readers to read the whole thread and take a request seriously) 8-}
> >>> Like I mentioned, if you insert a sig that has just one HTML element,
> >>> say a specific color or something of that sort, then it would be sent in
> >>> HTML.  Or use the Insert HTML and insert a horizontal line at the top or
> >>> bottom (i.e.  ). That will force it to be sent in HTML.
>
> >>> Terry R.
> >>> --
>
> >> Thanks Terry - I appreciate it, and I know many people (from postings
> >> elsewhere) use this workaround.  I just thought that if there were so
> >> many people working around something, it might make sense to request a
> >> fix.
>
> >> best regards
> >> /j
>
> > I can see how it is confusing, although I agree with the method.  Most
> > 

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

Terry R. wrote:
The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:48:11 PM, and on a whim, 
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:



On Mar 31, 7:11 pm, "Terry R."  wrote:

The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:03:07 PM, and on a whim,
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:




On Mar 31, 4:54 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
message source, the blank line is there (although the message 
has been

converted totext).
However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent 
it to
myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank 
line
is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message 
and

it becomes very hard to read.
OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
X-Mozilla-
Keys:
Message-ID: [omitted]
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
From: [omitted]
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:[omitted]
Subject: This Week...
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j
WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j

Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
I do your test.
It seems that only you have a problem ...
My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
Subject: TEST CONVERSION
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

You gottext, not HTML

/j

You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
In the case you furnishedThe inputtextin plaintext, so the mail
is also plaintext. All is NORMAL.
You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your inputtextas
test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.
So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.
SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an 
HTMLtext.
AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML 
format.

I can't furnish in HTML, SM always converts it to plaintext.  and I
never said I wanted to force anyone to do anything (except for certain
readers to read the whole thread and take a request seriously) 8-}

Like I mentioned, if you insert a sig that has just one HTML element,
say a specific color or something of that sort, then it would be sent in
HTML.  Or use the Insert HTML and insert a horizontal line at the top or
bottom (i.e.  ). That will force it to be sent in HTML.

Terry R.
--


Thanks Terry - I appreciate it, and I know many people (from postings
elsewhere) use this workaround.  I just thought that if there were so
many people working around something, it might make sense to request a
fix.

best regards
/j


I can see how it is confusing, although I agree with the method.  Most 
of us write a message and send it off.  I compose in HTML and I have a 
serif font as my default.  I have my settings set to send in HTML to 
specific people in my AB, and because my sig file is an HTML file, it's 
sent that way.


But if I don't have any specific HTML elements and I am composing in 
HTML mode, TB is taking the privilege to send the message as it sees 
fit, since there aren't any HTML elements included.


I would agree that if the user has the settings to compose in HTML, it 
should be sent in HTML, EVEN if there is only a font setting as the 
default.



Terry R.

How can i (as you said) compose in HTML if there is NOTHING in HTML ?
If there is nothing in HTML, SM have the right to send it in plain 
text because it's a plain-text text.


If you want that we try your problem ...tell us step by step how to get
your "the blank line is MISSING. " symptom.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
s

The times...they are a'changing (was: Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0)

[Daniel]

Leonidas Jones wrote:

Daniel wrote:

NoOp wrote:

On 03/30/2009 04:45 PM, Daniel wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Hi Daniel - Thanks for dropping in. If you look back at the last 50
or so responses, about 1/2 are devoted to reasons why I have problems
sending in plain text. SM doesn't convert it properly all the time,
if I send in a proportional font, I want people to read it in a
proportional font, etc. I won't repeat what I've already written.


but you do not determine how I (or anyone) see things!!

A;ll your mates might have their systems set up to convert all the
emails they receive to plain textso your sending things in HTML,
etc, might just be a waste of your time and the internet's bandwidth!!



To be honest, if the people who do SM are starting to enforce their
religious preferences, it may be time to find a different mail client.
8-{
/j


and please have the curtsy to leave some of the material to which you
are responding in your reply!!!

Daniel


And some wonder why I have this filter setup for new.mozilla.org:

Organization: http://groups.google.com

:-)



I don't like to tar a whole groupI'm sure there must be some
reasonable (and/or intelligent) people that use Google-Groups!!

Daniel


I agree.  I am afraid there is a whole generation that simply knows 
nothing about newsgroups.


If we all filter out the google groupers, we will never have an 
opportunity to introduce them to newsgroups.


Lee


Lee, I know MS wanted to re-set my clock over the week end, thinking we 
have finished Daylight Savings, but we didn't, so I had to re-adjust my 
clock!


This may explain how you managed to reply to my post before I posted my 
post!


Or is your ESP working overtime??

Daniel
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Terry R.]

The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:48:11 PM, and on a whim, 
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:



On Mar 31, 7:11 pm, "Terry R."  wrote:

The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:03:07 PM, and on a whim,
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:




On Mar 31, 4:54 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
converted totext).
However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
it becomes very hard to read.
OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
X-Mozilla-
Keys:
Message-ID: [omitted]
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
From: [omitted]
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:[omitted]
Subject: This Week...
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j
WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j

Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
I do your test.
It seems that only you have a problem ...
My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
Subject: TEST CONVERSION
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

You gottext, not HTML

/j

You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
In the case you furnishedThe inputtextin plaintext, so the mail
is also plaintext. All is NORMAL.
You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your inputtextas
test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.
So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.
SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an HTMLtext.
AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML format.

I can't furnish in HTML, SM always converts it to plaintext.  and I
never said I wanted to force anyone to do anything (except for certain
readers to read the whole thread and take a request seriously) 8-}

Like I mentioned, if you insert a sig that has just one HTML element,
say a specific color or something of that sort, then it would be sent in
HTML.  Or use the Insert HTML and insert a horizontal line at the top or
bottom (i.e.  ). That will force it to be sent in HTML.

Terry R.
--


Thanks Terry - I appreciate it, and I know many people (from postings
elsewhere) use this workaround.  I just thought that if there were so
many people working around something, it might make sense to request a
fix.

best regards
/j


I can see how it is confusing, although I agree with the method.  Most 
of us write a message and send it off.  I compose in HTML and I have a 
serif font as my default.  I have my settings set to send in HTML to 
specific people in my AB, and because my sig file is an HTML file, it's 
sent that way.


But if I don't have any specific HTML elements and I am composing in 
HTML mode, TB is taking the privilege to send the message as it sees 
fit, since there aren't any HTML elements included.


I would agree that if the user has the settings to compose in HTML, it 
should be sent in HTML, EVEN if there is only a font setting as the default.



Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 31, 7:11 pm, "Terry R."  wrote:
> The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:03:07 PM, and on a whim,
> googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 31, 4:54 pm, Ray_Net 
> > wrote:
> >> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> >>> On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
> >>> wrote:
>  googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
> > composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
> > that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
> > message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
> > converted totext).
> > However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
> > myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
> > is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
> > it becomes very hard to read.
> > OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
> > From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
> > X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
> > X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
> > X-Mozilla-
> > Keys:
> > Message-ID: [omitted]
> > Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
> > From: [omitted]
> > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
> > 1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > To:[omitted]
> > Subject: This Week...
> > Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
> > I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
> > Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> > this week)
> > If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> > ASAP.
> > Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
> > /j
> > WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
> > OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
> > I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
> > Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> > this week)
> > If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> > ASAP.
> > Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
> > /j
>  Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
>  I do your test.
>  It seems that only you have a problem ...
>  My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
>  Subject: TEST CONVERSION
>  Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>  X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
>  X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
>  OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
>  I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
>  Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
>  this week)
>  If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
>  ASAP.
>  Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
> >>> You gottext, not HTML
> >>> 
> >>> /j
> >> You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
> >> In the case you furnishedThe inputtextin plaintext, so the mail
> >> is also plaintext. All is NORMAL.
>
> >> You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your inputtextas
> >> test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.
> >> So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.
>
> >> SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
> >> If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an HTMLtext.
> >> AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML format.
>
> > I can't furnish in HTML, SM always converts it to plaintext.  and I
> > never said I wanted to force anyone to do anything (except for certain
> > readers to read the whole thread and take a request seriously) 8-}
>
> Like I mentioned, if you insert a sig that has just one HTML element,
> say a specific color or something of that sort, then it would be sent in
> HTML.  Or use the Insert HTML and insert a horizontal line at the top or
> bottom (i.e.  ). That will force it to be sent in HTML.
>
> Terry R.
> --
>
Thanks Terry - I appreciate it, and I know many people (from postings
elsewhere) use this workaround.  I just thought that if there were so
many people working around something, it might make sense to request a
fix.

best regards
/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Leonidas Jones]

Daniel wrote:

NoOp wrote:

On 03/30/2009 04:45 PM, Daniel wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Hi Daniel - Thanks for dropping in. If you look back at the last 50
or so responses, about 1/2 are devoted to reasons why I have problems
sending in plain text. SM doesn't convert it properly all the time,
if I send in a proportional font, I want people to read it in a
proportional font, etc. I won't repeat what I've already written.


but you do not determine how I (or anyone) see things!!

A;ll your mates might have their systems set up to convert all the
emails they receive to plain textso your sending things in HTML,
etc, might just be a waste of your time and the internet's bandwidth!!



To be honest, if the people who do SM are starting to enforce their
religious preferences, it may be time to find a different mail client.
8-{
/j


and please have the curtsy to leave some of the material to which you
are responding in your reply!!!

Daniel


And some wonder why I have this filter setup for new.mozilla.org:

Organization: http://groups.google.com

:-)



I don't like to tar a whole groupI'm sure there must be some
reasonable (and/or intelligent) people that use Google-Groups!!

Daniel


I agree.  I am afraid there is a whole generation that simply knows 
nothing about newsgroups.


If we all filter out the google groupers, we will never have an 
opportunity to introduce them to newsgroups.


Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Terry R.]

The date and time was Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:03:07 PM, and on a whim, 
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:



On Mar 31, 4:54 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
converted totext).
However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
it becomes very hard to read.
OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
X-Mozilla-
Keys:
Message-ID: [omitted]
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
From: [omitted]
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:[omitted]
Subject: This Week...
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j
WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j

Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
I do your test.
It seems that only you have a problem ...
My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
Subject: TEST CONVERSION
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

You gottext, not HTML

/j

You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
In the case you furnishedThe inputtextin plaintext, so the mail
is also plaintext. All is NORMAL.

You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your inputtextas
test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.
So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.

SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an HTMLtext.
AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML format.


I can't furnish in HTML, SM always converts it to plain text.  and I
never said I wanted to force anyone to do anything (except for certain
readers to read the whole thread and take a request seriously) 8-}


Like I mentioned, if you insert a sig that has just one HTML element, 
say a specific color or something of that sort, then it would be sent in 
HTML.  Or use the Insert HTML and insert a horizontal line at the top or 
bottom (i.e.  ). That will force it to be sent in HTML.



Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Daniel]

NoOp wrote:

On 03/30/2009 04:45 PM, Daniel wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Hi Daniel - Thanks for dropping in.  If you look back at the last 50
or so responses, about 1/2 are devoted to reasons why I have problems
sending in plain text.  SM doesn't convert it properly all the time,
if I send in a proportional font, I want people to read it in a
proportional font, etc.  I won't repeat what I've already written.


but you do not determine how I (or anyone) see things!!

A;ll your mates might have their systems set up to convert all the 
emails they receive to plain textso your sending things in HTML, 
etc, might just be a waste of your time and the internet's bandwidth!!




To be honest, if the people who do SM are starting to enforce their
religious preferences, it may be time to find a different mail client.
8-{
/j

and please have the curtsy to leave some of the material to which you 
are responding in your reply!!!


Daniel


And some wonder why I have this filter setup for new.mozilla.org:

Organization: http://groups.google.com

:-)



I don't like to tar a whole groupI'm sure there must be some 
reasonable (and/or intelligent) people that use Google-Groups!!


Daniel
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 31, 4:54 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
> > wrote:
> >> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> >>> Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
> >>> composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
> >>> that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
> >>> message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
> >>> converted totext).
> >>> However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
> >>> myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
> >>> is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
> >>> it becomes very hard to read.
> >>> OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
> >>> From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
> >>> X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
> >>> X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
> >>> X-Mozilla-
> >>> Keys:
> >>> Message-ID: [omitted]
> >>> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
> >>> From: [omitted]
> >>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
> >>> 1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
> >>> MIME-Version: 1.0
> >>> To:[omitted]
> >>> Subject: This Week...
> >>> Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >>> OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
> >>> I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
> >>> Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> >>> this week)
> >>> If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> >>> ASAP.
> >>> Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
> >>> /j
> >>> WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
> >>> OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
> >>> I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
> >>> Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> >>> this week)
> >>> If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> >>> ASAP.
> >>> Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
> >>> /j
> >> Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
> >> I do your test.
> >> It seems that only you have a problem ...
> >> My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
>
> >> Subject: TEST CONVERSION
> >> Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >> X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
> >> X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
>
> >> OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
>
> >> I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
>
> >> Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> >> this week)
>
> >> If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> >> ASAP.
> >> Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
>
> > You gottext, not HTML
> > 
> > /j
>
> You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
> In the case you furnishedThe inputtextin plaintext, so the mail
> is also plaintext. All is NORMAL.
>
> You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your inputtextas
> test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.
> So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.
>
> SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
> If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an HTMLtext.
> AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML format.

I can't furnish in HTML, SM always converts it to plain text.  and I
never said I wanted to force anyone to do anything (except for certain
readers to read the whole thread and take a request seriously) 8-}
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 31, 4:54 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
> > wrote:
> >> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> >>> Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
> >>> composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
> >>> that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
> >>> message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
> >>> converted totext).
> >>> However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
> >>> myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
> >>> is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
> >>> it becomes very hard to read.
> >>> OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
> >>> From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
> >>> X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
> >>> X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
> >>> X-Mozilla-
> >>> Keys:
> >>> Message-ID: [omitted]
> >>> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
> >>> From: [omitted]
> >>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
> >>> 1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
> >>> MIME-Version: 1.0
> >>> To:[omitted]
> >>> Subject: This Week...
> >>> Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >>> OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
> >>> I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
> >>> Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> >>> this week)
> >>> If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> >>> ASAP.
> >>> Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
> >>> /j
> >>> WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
> >>> OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
> >>> I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
> >>> Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> >>> this week)
> >>> If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> >>> ASAP.
> >>> Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
> >>> /j
> >> Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
> >> I do your test.
> >> It seems that only you have a problem ...
> >> My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
>
> >> Subject: TEST CONVERSION
> >> Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >> X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
> >> X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
>
> >> OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
>
> >> I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
>
> >> Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> >> this week)
>
> >> If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> >> ASAP.
> >> Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
>
> > You gottext, not HTML
> > 
> > /j
>
> You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
> In the case you furnishedThe inputtextin plaintext, so the mail
> is also plaintext. All is NORMAL.
>
> You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your inputtextas
> test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.
> So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.
>
> SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
> If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an HTMLtext.
> AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML format.

Yup - you must be right, I don't have a problem, I never had a
problem.  (or perhaps all my PCs, at home and work, uniquely have a
problem).  Terry is wrong.  There are no intermittent problems.  SM is
perfect.  You are also perfect.
God bless you.
Have a great Day!
(sigh)
/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
converted totext).
However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
it becomes very hard to read.
OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
X-Mozilla-
Keys:
Message-ID: [omitted]
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
From: [omitted]
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:[omitted]
Subject: This Week...
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j
WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
/j

Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
I do your test.
It seems that only you have a problem ...
My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 

Subject: TEST CONVERSION
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!

OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.

I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:

Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)

If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.



You got text, not HTML

/j



You always speak about a conversion ...there is no conversion needed.
In the case you furnishedThe input text in plain text, so the mail 
is also plain text. All is NORMAL.


You said also "the blank line is MISSING. " ...i used your input text as 
test, and i did not have any blank line missing as you show us.

So YOUR pc have a problem  not mine.

SM is WORKING PERFECTLY.
If you want to sent a mail in HTML format, please furnish him an HTML text.
AnyWay, you NEVER cannot force the recipient to read it in HTML format.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[NoOp]

On 03/30/2009 04:45 PM, Daniel wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
>> Hi Daniel - Thanks for dropping in.  If you look back at the last 50
>> or so responses, about 1/2 are devoted to reasons why I have problems
>> sending in plain text.  SM doesn't convert it properly all the time,
>> if I send in a proportional font, I want people to read it in a
>> proportional font, etc.  I won't repeat what I've already written.
>> 
> 
> but you do not determine how I (or anyone) see things!!
> 
> A;ll your mates might have their systems set up to convert all the 
> emails they receive to plain textso your sending things in HTML, 
> etc, might just be a waste of your time and the internet's bandwidth!!
> 
> 
>> To be honest, if the people who do SM are starting to enforce their
>> religious preferences, it may be time to find a different mail client.
>> 8-{
>> /j
>> 
> 
> and please have the curtsy to leave some of the material to which you 
> are responding in your reply!!!
> 
> Daniel

And some wonder why I have this filter setup for new.mozilla.org:

Organization: http://groups.google.com

:-)

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 30, 9:28 pm, Leonidas Jones  wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 6:44 pm, "Terry R."  wrote:
> >> The date and time was Monday, March 30, 2009 2:25:55 PM, and on a whim,
> >> googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:
>
> >>> On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> >>>   wrote:
>  googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
> > trying to be space efficient.
>  not everyone is viewing this group on google groups.
>  Some of us are using the mozilla newsgroup and others
>  are using the mailing lists
> >>> Yeah - I got that now
> > "If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
> > sent as html."
> > This is a false statement.
>  again, others have asked that you email them an html
>  message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
>  have failed to do that.
> >>> I'm happy to send a message to anyone.  just supply the email
> >   True statement:  "If you choose to send in
> > HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
> > convertto plaintextand send plaintext".
>  maybe it is and maybe its not
> >>> Actually, it is.  There doesn't seem to be any dispute about this
> >>> statement in this thread (until now). The debate is whether this is
> >>> the single, correct behavior.
> > This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
> > be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.
>  we've heard you many times.  Stop harping about it and
>  file a bug:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/andrequest
>  for such an item
> >>> Did so long ago
>  --
> >> We did some testing on this some time back and found that Moz clients
> >> require at least one HTML element to send as HTML (10-07-08 in MTMM).
> >> It can be done by creating a Template to use for your email and then
> >> insert a simple HTML code in body using the HTML Editor (Insert, HTML
> >> for TB).
>
> >> Or configure your sig file as HTML.
>
> >> Terry R.
> >> --
> >> Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
> >> Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
>
> > THANK YOU THANK YOU TERRY R.  WOULD EVERYONE ELSE PLEASE READ HIS
> > RESPONSE.
> > "Moz clients require at least one HTML element to send as HTML".
>
> > My request is to have an option that changes the Options ->  Format
> > default from "Auto-Detect" to "HTML".  So that it will require no HTML
> > to send as HTML.
>
> > I suppose that someone can say "I disagree, I believe the default
> > option should be Auto-Detect".  and you have your opinion, and I have
> > mine (athough if things were reversed, I would yield so that everyone
> > can have things as they want).  But please, can we stop the
> > discussions that say
>
> > "SM doesn'tconvertHTML to plaintext" (see Terry R's response above,
> > it does)
> > "You shouldn't want you HTML to go out as HTML unless it needs to be,
> > and here are some examples where it doesn't matter"  (I do want it,
> > and I have examples where it does matter).
>
> > 1) I've established what Options ->  Format ->  Auto-detect does.
> > 2)  I've established that there is no way to change the behavior
> > without workarounds of various painfulness (hand-select Options ->
> > Format ->  HTML every time, add a signature with sufficient HTML in it,
> > etc).
> > 3) I've politely requested a way to change the default from Auto-
> > Detect to "Rich (HTML)Text".
>
> > No offense to all, and I understand that some may not agree that my
> > request should be granted, but I think I've proved that it's a valid
> > request.
>
> > So if you want to continue discussion on how to implement, or (I
> > suppose, sigh) whether to implement, that's great, but can I please
> > stop proving that the issue exists?
>
> > Thanks all!
> > /j
>
> I wish I could just let this go, but I have to ask.  If your supposed
> html emails have not actually contained any html elements, why have we
> been going around this?  You might as well have been sending in 
> plaintextright along.
>
> Lee

No - HTML with nothing special is still HTML.  It can look different
to the recipient, also, the conversion to plain text isn't perfect.
It's intermittent, but I've had it remove paragraph-breaks and vaery
occasionally add line breaks randomly.  I'm getting tired of using
options->format->HTML every time i want to be sure a message arrives
looking like i sent it.  They get garbled only occasionally, but it's
always the ones where I needed it to look right.

/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Leonidas Jones]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 6:44 pm, "Terry R."  wrote:

The date and time was Monday, March 30, 2009 2:25:55 PM, and on a whim,
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:




On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
  wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
trying to be space efficient.

not everyone is viewing this group on google groups.
Some of us are using the mozilla newsgroup and others
are using the mailing lists

Yeah - I got that now

"If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
sent as html."
This is a false statement.

again, others have asked that you email them an html
message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
have failed to do that.

I'm happy to send a message to anyone.  just supply the email

  True statement:  "If you choose to send in
HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
convertto plaintextand send plaintext".

maybe it is and maybe its not

Actually, it is.  There doesn't seem to be any dispute about this
statement in this thread (until now). The debate is whether this is
the single, correct behavior.

This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.

we've heard you many times.  Stop harping about it and
file a bug:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/andrequest
for such an item

Did so long ago

--

We did some testing on this some time back and found that Moz clients
require at least one HTML element to send as HTML (10-07-08 in MTMM).
It can be done by creating a Template to use for your email and then
insert a simple HTML code in body using the HTML Editor (Insert, HTML
for TB).

Or configure your sig file as HTML.

Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.



THANK YOU THANK YOU TERRY R.  WOULD EVERYONE ELSE PLEASE READ HIS
RESPONSE.
"Moz clients require at least one HTML element to send as HTML".

My request is to have an option that changes the Options ->  Format
default from "Auto-Detect" to "HTML".  So that it will require no HTML
to send as HTML.

I suppose that someone can say "I disagree, I believe the default
option should be Auto-Detect".  and you have your opinion, and I have
mine (athough if things were reversed, I would yield so that everyone
can have things as they want).  But please, can we stop the
discussions that say

"SM doesn't convert HTML to plain text" (see Terry R's response above,
it does)
"You shouldn't want you HTML to go out as HTML unless it needs to be,
and here are some examples where it doesn't matter"  (I do want it,
and I have examples where it does matter).

1) I've established what Options ->  Format ->  Auto-detect does.
2)  I've established that there is no way to change the behavior
without workarounds of various painfulness (hand-select Options ->
Format ->  HTML every time, add a signature with sufficient HTML in it,
etc).
3) I've politely requested a way to change the default from Auto-
Detect to "Rich (HTML) Text".

No offense to all, and I understand that some may not agree that my
request should be granted, but I think I've proved that it's a valid
request.

So if you want to continue discussion on how to implement, or (I
suppose, sigh) whether to implement, that's great, but can I please
stop proving that the issue exists?

Thanks all!
/j



I wish I could just let this go, but I have to ask.  If your supposed 
html emails have not actually contained any html elements, why have we 
been going around this?  You might as well have been sending in plain 
text right along.


Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 30, 6:44 pm, "Terry R."  wrote:
> The date and time was Monday, March 30, 2009 2:25:55 PM, and on a whim,
> googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> >  wrote:
> >> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> >>> Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
> >>> trying to be space efficient.
> >> not everyone is viewing this group on google groups.
> >> Some of us are using the mozilla newsgroup and others
> >> are using the mailing lists
>
> > Yeah - I got that now
> >>> "If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
> >>> sent as html."
> >>> This is a false statement.
> >> again, others have asked that you email them an html
> >> message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
> >> have failed to do that.
>
> > I'm happy to send a message to anyone.  just supply the email
> >>>  True statement:  "If you choose to send in
> >>> HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
> >>> convertto plaintextand send plaintext".
> >> maybe it is and maybe its not
>
> > Actually, it is.  There doesn't seem to be any dispute about this
> > statement in this thread (until now). The debate is whether this is
> > the single, correct behavior.
> >>> This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
> >>> be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.
> >> we've heard you many times.  Stop harping about it and
> >> file a bug:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/andrequest
> >> for such an item
>
> > Did so long ago
> >> --
>
> We did some testing on this some time back and found that Moz clients
> require at least one HTML element to send as HTML (10-07-08 in MTMM).
> It can be done by creating a Template to use for your email and then
> insert a simple HTML code in body using the HTML Editor (Insert, HTML
> for TB).
>
> Or configure your sig file as HTML.
>
> Terry R.
> --
> Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
> Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.


THANK YOU THANK YOU TERRY R.  WOULD EVERYONE ELSE PLEASE READ HIS
RESPONSE.
"Moz clients require at least one HTML element to send as HTML".

My request is to have an option that changes the Options -> Format
default from "Auto-Detect" to "HTML".  So that it will require no HTML
to send as HTML.

I suppose that someone can say "I disagree, I believe the default
option should be Auto-Detect".  and you have your opinion, and I have
mine (athough if things were reversed, I would yield so that everyone
can have things as they want).  But please, can we stop the
discussions that say

"SM doesn't convert HTML to plain text" (see Terry R's response above,
it does)
"You shouldn't want you HTML to go out as HTML unless it needs to be,
and here are some examples where it doesn't matter"  (I do want it,
and I have examples where it does matter).

1) I've established what Options -> Format -> Auto-detect does.
2)  I've established that there is no way to change the behavior
without workarounds of various painfulness (hand-select Options ->
Format -> HTML every time, add a signature with sufficient HTML in it,
etc).
3) I've politely requested a way to change the default from Auto-
Detect to "Rich (HTML) Text".

No offense to all, and I understand that some may not agree that my
request should be granted, but I think I've proved that it's a valid
request.

So if you want to continue discussion on how to implement, or (I
suppose, sigh) whether to implement, that's great, but can I please
stop proving that the issue exists?

Thanks all!
/j

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 30, 6:58 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
> > composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
> > that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
> > message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
> > converted totext).
>
> > However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
> > myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
> > is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
> > it becomes very hard to read.
>
> > OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"
>
> > From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
> > X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
> > X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
> > X-Mozilla-
> > Keys:
> > Message-ID: [omitted]
> > Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
> > From: [omitted]
> > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
> > 1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > To:[omitted]
> > Subject: This Week...
> > Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> > OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
>
> > I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
>
> > Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> > this week)
>
> > If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> > ASAP.
> > Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
>
> > /j
>
> > WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER
>
> > OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
>
> > I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
> > Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> > this week)
> > If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> > ASAP.
> > Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
>
> > /j
>
> Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
> I do your test.
> It seems that only you have a problem ...
> My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 
>
> Subject: TEST CONVERSION
> Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
> X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!
>
> OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.
>
> I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
>
> Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
> this week)
>
> If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
> ASAP.
> Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.
>
>
You got text, not HTML

/j



___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
converted to text).

However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
it becomes very hard to read.

OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"

From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
X-Mozilla-
Keys:
Message-ID: [omitted]
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
From: [omitted]
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:[omitted]
Subject: This Week...
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.

I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:

Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)

If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

/j

WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER

OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.

I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

/j


Thanks for furnishing us an pseudo-working example.
I do your test.
It seems that only you have a problem ...
My RESULT IS CORRECT: Have a look 

Subject: TEST CONVERSION
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=2
X-UIDL: (%l!!\pP!!""i!!joZ"!

OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.

I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:

Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)

If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Daniel]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Hi Daniel - Thanks for dropping in.  If you look back at the last 50
or so responses, about 1/2 are devoted to reasons why I have problems
sending in plain text.  SM doesn't convert it properly all the time,
if I send in a proportional font, I want people to read it in a
proportional font, etc.  I won't repeat what I've already written.



but you do not determine how I (or anyone) see things!!

A;ll your mates might have their systems set up to convert all the 
emails they receive to plain textso your sending things in HTML, 
etc, might just be a waste of your time and the internet's bandwidth!!




To be honest, if the people who do SM are starting to enforce their
religious preferences, it may be time to find a different mail client.
8-{
/j



and please have the curtsy to leave some of the material to which you 
are responding in your reply!!!


Daniel
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Terry R.]

The date and time was Monday, March 30, 2009 2:25:55 PM, and on a whim, 
googl...@kwcpa.com pounded out on the keyboard:



On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
 wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
trying to be space efficient.

not everyone is viewing this group on google groups.
Some of us are using the mozilla newsgroup and others
are using the mailing lists


Yeah - I got that now

"If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
sent as html."
This is a false statement.

again, others have asked that you email them an html
message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
have failed to do that.


I'm happy to send a message to anyone.  just supply the email

 True statement:  "If you choose to send in
HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
convertto plaintextand send plaintext".

maybe it is and maybe its not


Actually, it is.  There doesn't seem to be any dispute about this
statement in this thread (until now). The debate is whether this is
the single, correct behavior.

This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.

we've heard you many times.  Stop harping about it and
file a bug:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/and request
for such an item


Did so long ago

--


We did some testing on this some time back and found that Moz clients 
require at least one HTML element to send as HTML (10-07-08 in MTMM). 
It can be done by creating a Template to use for your email and then 
insert a simple HTML code in body using the HTML Editor (Insert, HTML 
for TB).


Or configure your sig file as HTML.

Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 30, 5:41 pm, Leonidas Jones  wrote:
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>
> > googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> >> On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> >>> again, others have asked that you email them an html
> >>> message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
> >>> have failed to do that.
>
> >> I'm happy to send a message to anyone. just supply the email
>
> > I think you're using that as an excuse as some have told you to email
> > them, as I did:
> > news://news.mozilla.org:119/plodncayp5myflbunz2dnuvz_jila...@mozilla.org
> >http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.seamonkey/browse_threa...
>
> My email is valid here.
>
> Lee
sent to you too
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

I agree that, for any message, if you take select Options -> Format ->
send as Rich Text.  It will travel as HTML. My request is a way to
make this the default (i.e., override AutoDetect as the default in
Options -> Format).  I will now send you an email that, even though is
composed as HTML, and Sent as HTML (as per the options in Preferences
- Send Format), you will receive as plain text.

/j



On Mar 30, 5:32 pm, "Moz Champion (Dan)" 
wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> >  wrote:
> >> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> >>> Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
> >>> trying to be space efficient.
> >> not everyone is viewing this group on google groups.
> >> Some of us are using the mozilla newsgroup and others
> >> are using the mailing lists
>
> > Yeah - I got that now
> >>> "If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
> >>> sent as html."
> >>> This is a false statement.
> >> again, others have asked that you email them an html
> >> message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
> >> have failed to do that.
>
> > I'm happy to send a message to anyone.  just supply the email
> >>>  True statement:  "If you choose to send in
> >>> HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
> >>> convertto plaintextand send plaintext".
> >> maybe it is and maybe its not
>
> > Actually, it is.  There doesn't seem to be any dispute about this
> > statement in this thread (until now). The debate is whether this is
> > the single, correct behavior.
> >>> This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
> >>> be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.
> >> we've heard you many times.  Stop harping about it and
> >> file a bug:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/andrequest
> >> for such an item
>
> > Did so long ago
> >> --
>
> Well, when I Send a message from a HTML enabled account, in justtext,
> no html specifics, AND choose, send as HTML, it is received as the font
> I sent it in (proportional)
>
> If it had been 'converted' then I would have received the monospace
> version (plaintext).
>
> So for me, if I choose to send in html (only), then that is what is sent.
>
> my email is above, is attached to every post I make
> moz.champ...@sympatico.ca
>
> so send me a html formatted email, with no html objects/features in it
> already.





___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Leonidas Jones]

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo

again, others have asked that you email them an html
message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
have failed to do that.


I'm happy to send a message to anyone. just supply the email


I think you're using that as an excuse as some have told you to email
them, as I did:
news://news.mozilla.org:119/plodncayp5myflbunz2dnuvz_jila...@mozilla.org
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.seamonkey/browse_thread/thread/1fdacc790be26a1/dcb360180d9f94b6?q=#dcb360180d9f94b6




My email is valid here.

Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Moz Champion (Dan)]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
 wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
trying to be space efficient.

not everyone is viewing this group on google groups.
Some of us are using the mozilla newsgroup and others
are using the mailing lists


Yeah - I got that now

"If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
sent as html."
This is a false statement.

again, others have asked that you email them an html
message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
have failed to do that.


I'm happy to send a message to anyone.  just supply the email

 True statement:  "If you choose to send in
HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
convertto plaintextand send plaintext".

maybe it is and maybe its not


Actually, it is.  There doesn't seem to be any dispute about this
statement in this thread (until now). The debate is whether this is
the single, correct behavior.

This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.

we've heard you many times.  Stop harping about it and
file a bug:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/and request
for such an item


Did so long ago

--



Well, when I Send a message from a HTML enabled account, in just text, 
no html specifics, AND choose, send as HTML, it is received as the font 
I sent it in (proportional)


If it had been 'converted' then I would have received the monospace 
version (plain text).


So for me, if I choose to send in html (only), then that is what is sent.

my email is above, is attached to every post I make
moz.champ...@sympatico.ca

so send me a html formatted email, with no html objects/features in it 
already.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo

again, others have asked that you email them an html
message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
have failed to do that.


I'm happy to send a message to anyone.  just supply the email


I think you're using that as an excuse as some have 
told you to email them, as I did: 
news://news.mozilla.org:119/plodncayp5myflbunz2dnuvz_jila...@mozilla.org

http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.seamonkey/browse_thread/thread/1fdacc790be26a1/dcb360180d9f94b6?q=#dcb360180d9f94b6

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
 wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
> > trying to be space efficient.
>
> not everyone is viewing this group on google groups.
> Some of us are using the mozilla newsgroup and others
> are using the mailing lists
>
Yeah - I got that now
>
> > "If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
> > sent as html."
>
> > This is a false statement.
>
> again, others have asked that you email them an html
> message and then we'll go from there, and so far you
> have failed to do that.
>
I'm happy to send a message to anyone.  just supply the email
>
> >  True statement:  "If you choose to send in
> > HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
> >convertto plaintextand send plaintext".
>
> maybe it is and maybe its not
>
Actually, it is.  There doesn't seem to be any dispute about this
statement in this thread (until now). The debate is whether this is
the single, correct behavior.
>
> > This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
> > be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.
>
> we've heard you many times.  Stop harping about it and
> file a bug:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/and request
> for such an item
>
Did so long ago
>
> --
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
trying to be space efficient.


not everyone is viewing this group on google groups. 
Some of us are using the mozilla newsgroup and others 
are using the mailing lists



"If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
sent as html."

This is a false statement. 


again, others have asked that you email them an html 
message and then we'll go from there, and so far you 
have failed to do that.



 True statement:  "If you choose to send in
HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
convert to plain text and send plain text".


maybe it is and maybe its not


This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.


we've heard you many times.  Stop harping about it and 
file a bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ and request 
for such an item


--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Sorry - i'm viewing on the web where all prior messages show up, I was
trying to be space efficient.

"If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be
sent as html."

This is a false statement.  True statement:  "If you choose to send in
HTML, and there is nothing in your message that warrants HTML, SM will
convert to plain text and send plain text".

This is a well-established fact.  I am asking that the auto-conversion
be optional, so that your original statement becomes the truth.

Thanks!
/j


On Mar 30, 2:22 pm, "Moz Champion (Dan)" 
wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > I wish Mozilla did allow me a choice.  No matter how hard I try to
> > have messages go, by default, in HTML.  Mozilla looks at them and says
> > "yeah, plaintextis good enough" and converts them.
>
> > that's the problem.
>
> > All I'm suggesting is an OPTION to disable the auto-conversion.  I
> > can't believe how many people here don't think options are good.
>
> > /j
>
> If you dont quote previous messages, all context is lost
>
> If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be sent
> as html.
>
> If you further refuse to quote previous context, there is no choice but
> for me to ignore your messages thank you.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Moz Champion (Dan)]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

I wish Mozilla did allow me a choice.  No matter how hard I try to
have messages go, by default, in HTML.  Mozilla looks at them and says
"yeah, plain text is good enough" and converts them.

that's the problem.

All I'm suggesting is an OPTION to disable the auto-conversion.  I
can't believe how many people here don't think options are good.

/j




If you dont quote previous messages, all context is lost


If you choose to send in HTML then it wont be converted, it will be sent 
as html.


If you further refuse to quote previous context, there is no choice but 
for me to ignore your messages thank you.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Ok - here's an example of the problem, based on a short message I
composed in HTML.  In HTML, there was a blank line before the line
that starts "Me".  When I go into the sent folder and do a view ->
message source, the blank line is there (although the message has been
converted to text).

However, when I just look at either the received message (i sent it to
myself, among others), or the copy in my sent folder, the blank line
is MISSING.  Pull a few blank lines in a row from a long message and
it becomes very hard to read.

OUTPUT OF "VIEW -> MESSAGE SOURCE"

>From - Mon Mar 30 13:44:36 2009
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
X-Mozilla-
Keys:
Message-ID: [omitted]
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:44:35 -0400
From: [omitted]
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:
1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:[omitted]
Subject: This Week...
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.

I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:

Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)

If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

/j

WHAT I SEE IN MY SENT FOLDER

OK - Wed is the first of 3 more prepaid weeks.

I -believe- the following people are playing Wednesday:
Me, Kathy, Art, Lisa, Jon, Peter, John, Beth, Kevin(Ed is away
this week)
If you're on the list above and aren't "IN", please let me know
ASAP.
Otherwise, we'll assume a  quorum.

/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

I wish Mozilla did allow me a choice.  No matter how hard I try to
have messages go, by default, in HTML.  Mozilla looks at them and says
"yeah, plain text is good enough" and converts them.

that's the problem.

All I'm suggesting is an OPTION to disable the auto-conversion.  I
can't believe how many people here don't think options are good.

/j

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Moz Champion (Dan)]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Yes - putting stuff in every message that forces the converter to say
"send in HTML" is a common workaround that a lot of people do (see the
original thread I referenced at the top of this one).  Having a fancy
HTML signature also works as a workaround.

In fact, it looks like the workarounds are going to be the solution
because no one wants to make things right.  Has anyone looked through
their own sent folder to see if all their converted multi-paragraph
non-HTML messages converted properly?  THAT's your test case.  I have
not been able to figure out why it does paragraph breaks correctly
sometimes and not others, that doesn't meant there isn't a
deterministic problem, I just can't identify it.

However, that's not the point.  The point is that I want my Email to
be read in HTML when I send it in HTML.  If I use a proportional font
I want the reader to see a proportional font, etc.

If you post and say "Since -one- (only one) of the reasons you want to
do this is to fix a bug you can reproduce, we're going to ignore all
the other reasons" then your religion is showing.  Sad thing that 8-}

/j




Spammers would love it if the author could pre-determine how the 
recipient reads email. The fact is, the author has little or NO control 
over how the recipient will read his messages.


Some programs (Pine comes to mind) don't read HTML at all, they are 
plain text only. Most modern email or news programs can display either 
plain text or HTML, but at the recipients decision.  Mozilla products 
allow you a choice even in HTML, original HTML or simple HTML.


There is no means of you ensuring anyone to read it the way you 
intended, they will read it in the means they have preset their email 
(or news or even web browser) to display.


That may be plain text, html, simple html, html with javascript, without 
javascript, with their choice of fonts (or not), in colour or in black 
or white, the choice is up to the reader, the recipient, NOT the author.


Only send HTML to those who have requested such.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Yes - putting stuff in every message that forces the converter to say
"send in HTML" is a common workaround that a lot of people do (see the
original thread I referenced at the top of this one).  Having a fancy
HTML signature also works as a workaround.

In fact, it looks like the workarounds are going to be the solution
because no one wants to make things right.  Has anyone looked through
their own sent folder to see if all their converted multi-paragraph
non-HTML messages converted properly?  THAT's your test case.  I have
not been able to figure out why it does paragraph breaks correctly
sometimes and not others, that doesn't meant there isn't a
deterministic problem, I just can't identify it.

However, that's not the point.  The point is that I want my Email to
be read in HTML when I send it in HTML.  If I use a proportional font
I want the reader to see a proportional font, etc.

If you post and say "Since -one- (only one) of the reasons you want to
do this is to fix a bug you can reproduce, we're going to ignore all
the other reasons" then your religion is showing.  Sad thing that 8-}

/j

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

SM doesn't convert it properly all the time,


If you cannot furnish a testcase to reproduce the problem, nobody will 
be able to solve your problem.
But i repeat if you position your preference to send only in html - and 
if you at least put an html stuff into your mail(per exemple, use an 
automatic signature in html format) ... SM WILL NOT convert your message 
in plain text. So you don't care about a possible bad conversion.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Hi Daniel - Thanks for dropping in.  If you look back at the last 50
or so responses, about 1/2 are devoted to reasons why I have problems
sending in plain text.  SM doesn't convert it properly all the time,
if I send in a proportional font, I want people to read it in a
proportional font, etc.  I won't repeat what I've already written.

To be honest, if the people who do SM are starting to enforce their
religious preferences, it may be time to find a different mail client.
8-{
/j

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Daniel]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Hi

1)  I obviously cannot send you a sample.txt file for an INTERMITTENT
issue.

2) We both agree that, for example, if I write a message in Comic Sans
MS, and want my messages to go out IN THAT FONT (because that's the
way I like people to see my messages), there's no way to do that
without





Thanks!
/j


Sorry  i did not have any problem - all is perfect 
If you cannot sent me a sample.txt file for testing, i will close this
issue.




But, j, I might not have Comic Sans MS installed on my computer, so 
either I don't see your message at all or, in my set-up, I might have it 
set up that any request for Comic Sans Ms is substituted by Wingdings!


What you want does not determine how a person sees your message, so why 
not leave it all up to them, and their set up, and just send your 
messages in plain text?!?!


Daniel
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Yes, Thanks for the welcome, but I've been on since '96.  Many people
choose to view in the format that people send.

No offense, because this isn't directed primarily at you, but I never
thought I would stumble across a religious "EMail must travel as plain
text if at all possible" war here.  I just want SM to be as intuitive
as can be

/j


On Mar 29, 12:44 pm, Benoit Renard  wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > 2) We both agree that, for example, if I write a message in Comic Sans
> > MS, and want my messages to go out IN THAT FONT (because that's the
> > way I like people to see my messages)
>
> Welcome to the web. Here, /we/ decide how to view your e-mail messages.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Benoit Renard]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

2) We both agree that, for example, if I write a message in Comic Sans
MS, and want my messages to go out IN THAT FONT (because that's the
way I like people to see my messages)


Welcome to the web. Here, /we/ decide how to view your e-mail messages.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Hi

1)  I obviously cannot send you a sample.txt file for an INTERMITTENT
issue.

2) We both agree that, for example, if I write a message in Comic Sans
MS, and want my messages to go out IN THAT FONT (because that's the
way I like people to see my messages), there's no way to do that
without
a) making sure there's some bold, or something that "convinces" SM
that HTML is required
b) having to do "Options->Format-Rich HTML Only", for EVERY MESSAGE

I would argue that reason #2 is enough to provide an option to disable
auto-conversion.  Suppose I just want every message to go in HTML
because I want people to see the message on the other end just the way
I wrote it?  Not converted to boring, monospaced text.

Further, I would suggest that if you write a lot of multi-paragraph
Email with no special formatting, that if you look through your sent
folder, you will find at least a few emails with paragraph-breaks
missing.  I did this exercise this morning and found 8 out of about 40
in the last week.  I could send you one, but
 a) you're not getting the source message, so you don't have a
test case
 b) Because the problem is intermittent, it may not fail for
you.

Still, I think the "bad conversion" is a secondar issue. Consider
this:
If Seamonkey provides a per-message option "Options->Format-Rich
HTML", why is it so wrong for me to ask for an option that makes this
the -default- selection?  Motives are secondary.

Please don't "close" this issue, please treat it.

Thanks!
/j





>
> Sorry  i did not have any problem - all is perfect 
> If you cannot sent me a sample.txt file for testing, i will close this
> issue.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

The problem is - I tried just now to create a test message, but it
looked proper when I sent it.  Then I looked back in my sent folder.
Out of 6 messages I sent today, one was garbled, the other 5 looked
fine.  I don't know how to reproduce the problem on demand as it is
intermittent.  But the most common problem is that paragraph breaks
are reduced to a single NewLine.  Look through your sent box and I'm
sure you'll find one or two with this issue.

Also - regardless of whether it does the text conversion properly.
Shouldn't -I- decide whether I want the recipient to see  nice, clean,
variable-width-text HTML or ugly plain text?  I like my Email to look
sharp.

Shutting off the option seems like an harmless change.
/j


Sorry  i did not have any problem - all is perfect 
If you cannot sent me a sample.txt file for testing, i will close this 
issue.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

The problem is - I tried just now to create a test message, but it
looked proper when I sent it.  Then I looked back in my sent folder.
Out of 6 messages I sent today, one was garbled, the other 5 looked
fine.  I don't know how to reproduce the problem on demand as it is
intermittent.  But the most common problem is that paragraph breaks
are reduced to a single NewLine.  Look through your sent box and I'm
sure you'll find one or two with this issue.

Also - regardless of whether it does the text conversion properly.
Shouldn't -I- decide whether I want the recipient to see  nice, clean,
variable-width-text HTML or ugly plain text?  I like my Email to look
sharp.

Shutting off the option seems like an harmless change.
/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Hi Ray-net - actually a good Email, as you confirmed my issue -
Thanks.  However, your conclusions are incorrect...

"if you don't use any html gadget when composing your mail... the mail
is sent in plain text."

I absolutely agree - thanks!

"In this case, there is no need of a conversion, because there is
nothing to convert. SM1.1.14 is working perfectly"

I absolutely disagree.  This is not a true statement at all.

To prove it, do a message in html (text only, like you did before),
but make the sentences long,  and put in several paragraph breaks, and
maybe a couple of numbered lists.  Use  only to end a paragraph (2
of them), and to end a list item.  Then send it and see what it looks
like after SM does it's conversion.  Many of the  will be
converted to , removing the blank line between paragraphs. And
sometimes a line will get a  inserted randomly.

You CANNOT see this with a short message, but boy does SM mess up the
long ones.

thanks for your interest.
/j


As a first analyze, it looks not that SM does badly an html to plain 
text conversion, but rather SM did not like long lines and therefore 
cut.anyway


Please help me trying to execute your test by .
sending me a mail with a sample.txt file attached containing what i can 
cut/paste into my SM mail composition.

My mail adress is tbrraymond.schmit...@tbrscarlet.be
(Remove the TBR string = ToBeRemoved)

I will do the test with your options:
1. I have: Compose messages in HTML for my mail account.
1. a. And when in mail: The Option - Format is by default: Auto-Detect
2. I did not have: Compose messages in HTML for this newsgroup account.
3. For mail & newsgroup preference my setting is : "HTML only"
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Hi Ray-net - actually a good Email, as you confirmed my issue -
Thanks.  However, your conclusions are incorrect...

"if you don't use any html gadget when composing your mail... the mail
is sent in plain text."

I absolutely agree - thanks!

"In this case, there is no need of a conversion, because there is
nothing to convert. SM1.1.14 is working perfectly"

I absolutely disagree.  This is not a true statement at all.

To prove it, do a message in html (text only, like you did before),
but make the sentences long,  and put in several paragraph breaks, and
maybe a couple of numbered lists.  Use  only to end a paragraph (2
of them), and to end a list item.  Then send it and see what it looks
like after SM does it's conversion.  Many of the  will be
converted to , removing the blank line between paragraphs. And
sometimes a line will get a  inserted randomly.

You CANNOT see this with a short message, but boy does SM mess up the
long ones.

thanks for your interest.
/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
  Yet, if I type a 1-line message (no signature,
> etc), and send it, even to myself, it appears in the sent folder, and
> (if i'm the recipient) in my inbox, only as plain text.  No one has
> said that they do this and then upon Viewing Page Source, see type
> HTML.

Correct  i have done your test.

A. Maintaining: For mail & newsgroup preference my setting is : "Ask me 
what to do"


A-1. Just typing one line: "This is my text test."
Sending it to me
The result is:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=0
X-UIDL: AFU"!Xoi"!cf6!!QSJ"!

This is my text test.

A-2. Just typing one line: This line is with HTML info.
- centered and with the word HTML in bold and +A
Sending it to me (this time he ask me the sent-format to be used - i say 
both).

The result is:
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--040900020805050504020102
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This line is with *HTML* info.




--040900020805050504020102
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit






This line is with HTML info.






--040900020805050504020102--

A-3. Just typing one line: Send HTML text in HTML-ONLY sending format.
- with the first word HTML in bold and +A
Sending it to me (this time he ask me the sent-format to be used - i say 
HTML ONLY).

The result is:
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: sif 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1
X-UIDL: ?!6!!j@,"!&7X"!21Z"!






Send HTML text in HTML-ONLY sending format





B. Finally, i changed: For mail & newsgroup preference my setting is : 
"HTML ONLY"

- then stop/start SM same testing
B-1. Just typing one line: "This is my text test."
Sending it to me
The result is:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-Scarlet-Metrics: rago 1390; Body=0
X-UIDL: 3b3"!`R(#!F`3!!ZlE!!

This is my text test.

B-2.  Just typing one line: This line is with HTML info.
- centered and with the word HTML in bold and +A
Sending it to me
The result is:
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: hel 20001; Body=1 Fuz1=1
X-UIDL: )DX"![=A"!NcA"!,@o"!






This line is with HTML info.




CONCLUSIONS:
All is ok, BUT if you don't use any html gadget when composing your mail 
... the mail is sent in plain text.
In this case, there is no need of a conversion, because there is nothing 
to convert.

SM 1.1.14 is working perfectly and did not screw up the text sent.
The only thing we can argue, is the explanation about:
For mail & newsgroup preference my setting is : "HTML ONLY"
It is written: "Send the message as formatted text(HTML) ANYWAY..."
This sentence is true only if there is at least ONE html gadget present 
in the mail.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

I don't designate domains as "text" or "HTML" at all.  and my #3
setting is HTML only.  Yet, if I type a 1-line message (no signature,
etc), and send it, even to myself, it appears in the sent folder, and
(if i'm the recipient) in my inbox, only as plain text.  No one has
said that they do this and then upon Viewing Page Source, see type
HTML.

/j
1. as you have
1a - as you have
2 I know nothing about what happens when posting to Newsgroups.  My
issue concerns Email
3 mine is "HTML ONLY"
4 me neither
5 me neither


On Mar 27, 10:51 am, Ray_Net 
wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > I haven't tried SM2 - still using SM1 - this was a request for SM2
>
> Therefore i didi not understand that you have the problem.
> I am in SM 1.1.14 without experienced the problem.
> 1. I have: Compose messages in HTML for my mail account.
> 1. a. And when in mail: The Option - Format is by default: Auto-Detect
> 2. I did not have: Compose messages in HTML for this newsgroup account.
> 3. For mail & newsgroup preference my setting is : "Ask me what to do"
> 4. I did not test with a sending list...
> 5. I don't have positionned a recipient who need "only in plaintextmode".
>
> That's all my setting regarding your problem "Auto conversion(bad) in
> plaintext"
> - Perhaps your problem appear because you have the point 5.(with such a
> recipient) together or not together with point 4.(sending to a list)

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

I haven't tried SM2 - still using SM1 - this was a request for SM2


Therefore i didi not understand that you have the problem.
I am in SM 1.1.14 without experienced the problem.
1. I have: Compose messages in HTML for my mail account.
1. a. And when in mail: The Option - Format is by default: Auto-Detect
2. I did not have: Compose messages in HTML for this newsgroup account.
3. For mail & newsgroup preference my setting is : "Ask me what to do"
4. I did not test with a sending list...
5. I don't have positionned a recipient who need "only in plain text mode".

That's all my setting regarding your problem "Auto conversion(bad) in 
plain text"
- Perhaps your problem appear because you have the point 5.(with such a 
recipient) together or not together with point 4.(sending to a list)

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

I haven't tried SM2 - still using SM1 - this was a request for SM2
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Barry Edwin Gilmour]

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Dear Mr. Potamus.  You should really View Message Source and you will
see what i mean.  I just sent myself an Email composed in HTML, and
having that setting you refer to set to HTML only.  Here's what I
received...
-
Subject: test
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is a test message
---
as you can see, it was converted to plain text.

The developers have confirmed there is an issue.  Please don't
dispute,  What have I ever done to you?


what developers? No developers have been here to say anything about 
this.


When I send in html, I also receive in html, because I've got all my 
settings set correctly.  The problem is you don't, and we are 
*trying* to help you.


If you have the setting set to send in both html and plain text, 
then scroll down a bit, in View Source, and you'll see the html part.


Further, you need a few other settings:

To view, its: View, Message Body As, and Original HTML.

Also, you need: Edit, Mail & Newsgroups Accoung Settings, select the 
account, and under Composition and Addressing, at the top right you 
need to select "Compose messages in html format."


This is one of the downsides of SM and TB, you've got all these 
frakken various settings everywhere.




send me a message and I'll tell you if I received it in html or not.



never mind, I just realized something.  This is SM2, and not SM 1.1.x.


Check out the new Thunderbird's
"*Bug 466674*  - 
default action should be to send out html + plaintext w/o asking"

and specifically:-
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=466674#c4
which pretty-much summarises the current SM2 options.

Even with all SM-2.0b1pre preferences set to HTML, with the 
sole-exception being the manual-selection of each-message's 
Compose-window's toolbar-menu ~ Option/Format/ ~ The Auto-Detect 
setting converts HTML-text to plain-text without advising the user. 
Auto-Detect does work OK in all other settings. HTML-text manually-fixed 
on each-message, by the Option/Format/Rich-Text(HTML)only menu, will 
send as HTML. Barry.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[NoOp]

On 03/26/2009 06:52 PM, Leonidas Jones wrote:

> 
> Let us please remember that SeaMonkey 2 is yet an alpha. It has a ways 
> to go, but it is going to be a great step forward, and has to be the way 
> of the future for the suite approach.

Actually, the update to 2.0a3 is a beta according to my update manager and:


[DIR]   Parent Directory -
[ ] seamonkey-2.0b1pre.en-US.linux-i686.complete.mar26-Mar-2009 
01:06   14M
[ ] seamonkey-2.0b1pre.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2 26-Mar-2009 01:06   
13M
[ ] seamonkey-2.0b1pre.en-US.mac.complete.mar   26-Mar-2009 02:43   
22M
[ ] seamonkey-2.0b1pre.en-US.mac.dmg26-Mar-2009 02:43   23M
[ ] seamonkey-2.0b1pre.en-US.win32.complete.mar 26-Mar-2009 01:42   
13M
[ ] seamonkey-2.0b1pre.en-US.win32.crashreporter-symbols.zip
26-Mar-2009
01:42   51M
[ ] seamonkey-2.0b1pre.en-US.win32.installer.exe26-Mar-2009 01:42   
10M
[ ] seamonkey-2.0b1pre.en-US.win32.zip  26-Mar-2009 01:42   15M

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Leonidas Jones]

Ray_Net wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:


YOU: what developers? No developers have been here to say anything
about this.
ME: Developer input from earlier in this thread...
==
The forum thread points to bug 157346 which has been resolved as a
duplicate of bug 136502. Comment 8 there states that you can achieve
what you want on a per-domain basis so there's a partial workaround.
The
real fix needs someone to step up and write a patch for that bug,
though. I think the best way to do it would be to just introduce a
pref
and handle any UI changes in follow-up bugs.

Thanks very much everyone. Again to the developers, a flag to shut
off auto-conversion to plain text would be very much appreciated. 8-}



If your problem of the auto-conversion to plain text appear only with
SM 2 ...I will stay the rest of my live with SM 1.1.x ... because
...most of the time ... some bugs/new-feature-suggestion are never
corrected/implemented.


Let us please remember that SeaMonkey 2 is yet an alpha. It has a ways 
to go, but it is going to be a great step forward, and has to be the way 
of the future for the suite approach.



AS I said earlier, I am not noticing the problem, but I am usually on 
plain text for both composing and reading.


Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:


YOU: what developers? No developers have been here to say anything
about this.
ME: Developer input from earlier in this thread...
==
The forum thread points to bug 157346 which has been resolved as a
duplicate of bug 136502. Comment 8 there states that you can achieve
what you want on a per-domain basis so there's a partial workaround.
The
real fix needs someone to step up and write a patch for that bug,
though. I think the best way to do it would be to just introduce a
pref
and handle any UI changes in follow-up bugs.

Thanks very much everyone.  Again to the developers, a flag to shut
off auto-conversion to plain text would be very much appreciated. 8-}



If your problem of the auto-conversion to plain text appear only with
 SM 2 ...I will stay the rest of my live with SM 1.1.x ... because 
...most of the time  ... some bugs/new-feature-suggestion are never 
corrected/implemented.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

OT Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Leonidas Jones]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Sir -  why would you change the subject of my request, which I have
proven is legitimate, to "OT:"?

I'm sorry your solutions don't work.  Your logic "If I can't help him,
then I don't want anyone else to" is so counter to the spirit of this
forum, and this program, that I can't begin to understand it.
Everyone of my posts to this thread has been respectfully written, and
100% on-Topic.

  I admit that you have me at a disadvantage as I don't know how to
change it back, so I guess you "beat me", insuring that I will not get
serious consideration for my request. Honestly, I hope that makes your
day.  God Bless You.

/j


It is Grant's response that he considered OT, and was done to warn those 
viewing the thread that his reply is not offering support on the topic. 
 I consider this to be the case with mine, so I have done the same.  It 
would have been better for you to reply to him in his original OT reply. 
 That way the sub thread would have been moved to mozilla.general, the 
appropriate place for off topic discussions, rather then muddying your 
original thread.  I have also set followups to this post to mozilla.general.


You don't need to do anything to change it back.  Only reply to the OT 
posts if you want to pursue the OT sub thread in mozilla.general. 
Otherwise, simply reply to the last post that you think has offered you 
any help.


I am afraid I am a loss to help you as well.  I generally both view and 
compose in plain text, so I may not be the best tester for this issue. 
However, in the testing I have done with html posting and reading, all 
seems to be working fine. Since I really prefer not to work in html in 
mail, there may be issues here that my more limited testing is not showing.


followup set to mozilla.general

Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Sir -  why would you change the subject of my request, which I have
proven is legitimate, to "OT:"?

I'm sorry your solutions don't work.  Your logic "If I can't help him,
then I don't want anyone else to" is so counter to the spirit of this
forum, and this program, that I can't begin to understand it.
Everyone of my posts to this thread has been respectfully written, and
100% on-Topic.

 I admit that you have me at a disadvantage as I don't know how to
change it back, so I guess you "beat me", insuring that I will not get
serious consideration for my request. Honestly, I hope that makes your
day.  God Bless You.

/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

OT: Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:


No offense Mr. Potamus, but I have been a Netscape/Mozilla/Seamonkey
user for 24 years, 


impossible.  That would be around 1985, and Netscape 
came out in the early 90's.


followup set to mozilla.general

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Dear Mr. Potamus...

ME "I have it set to send ONLY HTML, and I get back plain text"
YOU: "if you have the setting to "HTML and Plain text, scroll down to
see the HTML:
ME:  "I have it set to send ONLY HTML, and I get back ONLY plain text,
nothing to scroll down to"

YOU: "To view, its: View, Message Body As, and Original HTML. "
ME: "??? I use View -> Message Source"
(Perhaps you're converting -your- view -TO- HTML")

ME: "I am composing in HTML" (and earlier, "I have the box checked in
Mail & Newsgroup Settings-> Composition & Addressing -> Compose in
HTML Format")
YOU: Also, you need: Edit, Mail & Newsgroups Accoung
Settings, select the account, and under Composition and
Addressing, at the top right you need to select
"Compose messages in html format."
ME: "I am composing in HTML" (and earlier, "I have the box checked in
Mail & Newsgroup Settings-> Composition & Addressing -> Compose in
HTML Format")

YOU: what developers? No developers have been here to say anything
about this.
ME: Developer input from earlier in this thread...
==
The forum thread points to bug 157346 which has been resolved as a
duplicate of bug 136502. Comment 8 there states that you can achieve
what you want on a per-domain basis so there's a partial workaround.
The
real fix needs someone to step up and write a patch for that bug,
though. I think the best way to do it would be to just introduce a
pref
and handle any UI changes in follow-up bugs.

HTH

Jens
===


No offense Mr. Potamus, but I have been a Netscape/Mozilla/Seamonkey
user for 24 years, and have been pursuing this issue for about the
last 5 of them.  There is no easy fix to it.  I understand that you
want to appear to provide an answer, but I assure you it is a bug.
This post was directed to the developers and although I appreciate
your intent to help me find a workaround, I really want them to fix it
properly.  I'm ok if you want to stop posting to this thread.

Thanks very much everyone.  Again to the developers, a flag to shut
off auto-conversion to plain text would be very much appreciated. 8-}

Have a great day!
/j




I've done all I can, so I'm done with you.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Dear Mr. Potamus...

ME "I have it set to send ONLY HTML, and I get back plain text"
YOU: "if you have the setting to "HTML and Plain text, scroll down to
see the HTML:
ME:  "I have it set to send ONLY HTML, and I get back ONLY plain text,
nothing to scroll down to"

YOU: "To view, its: View, Message Body As, and Original HTML. "
ME: "??? I use View -> Message Source"
(Perhaps you're converting -your- view -TO- HTML")

ME: "I am composing in HTML" (and earlier, "I have the box checked in
Mail & Newsgroup Settings-> Composition & Addressing -> Compose in
HTML Format")
YOU: Also, you need: Edit, Mail & Newsgroups Accoung
Settings, select the account, and under Composition and
Addressing, at the top right you need to select
"Compose messages in html format."
ME: "I am composing in HTML" (and earlier, "I have the box checked in
Mail & Newsgroup Settings-> Composition & Addressing -> Compose in
HTML Format")

YOU: what developers? No developers have been here to say anything
about this.
ME: Developer input from earlier in this thread...
==
The forum thread points to bug 157346 which has been resolved as a
duplicate of bug 136502. Comment 8 there states that you can achieve
what you want on a per-domain basis so there's a partial workaround.
The
real fix needs someone to step up and write a patch for that bug,
though. I think the best way to do it would be to just introduce a
pref
and handle any UI changes in follow-up bugs.

HTH

Jens
===


No offense Mr. Potamus, but I have been a Netscape/Mozilla/Seamonkey
user for 24 years, and have been pursuing this issue for about the
last 5 of them.  There is no easy fix to it.  I understand that you
want to appear to provide an answer, but I assure you it is a bug.
This post was directed to the developers and although I appreciate
your intent to help me find a workaround, I really want them to fix it
properly.  I'm ok if you want to stop posting to this thread.

Thanks very much everyone.  Again to the developers, a flag to shut
off auto-conversion to plain text would be very much appreciated. 8-}

Have a great day!
/j


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Dear Mr. Potamus.  You should really View Message Source and you will
see what i mean.  I just sent myself an Email composed in HTML, and
having that setting you refer to set to HTML only.  Here's what I
received...
-
Subject: test
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is a test message
---
as you can see, it was converted to plain text.

The developers have confirmed there is an issue.  Please don't
dispute,  What have I ever done to you?


what developers? No developers have been here to say anything about this.

When I send in html, I also receive in html, because I've got all my 
settings set correctly.  The problem is you don't, and we are *trying* 
to help you.


If you have the setting set to send in both html and plain text, then 
scroll down a bit, in View Source, and you'll see the html part.


Further, you need a few other settings:

To view, its: View, Message Body As, and Original HTML.

Also, you need: Edit, Mail & Newsgroups Accoung Settings, select the 
account, and under Composition and Addressing, at the top right you 
need to select "Compose messages in html format."


This is one of the downsides of SM and TB, you've got all these 
frakken various settings everywhere.




send me a message and I'll tell you if I received it in html or not.



never mind, I just realized something.  This is SM2, 
and not SM 1.1.x.


--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Dear Mr. Potamus.  You should really View Message Source and you will
see what i mean.  I just sent myself an Email composed in HTML, and
having that setting you refer to set to HTML only.  Here's what I
received...
-
Subject: test
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is a test message
---
as you can see, it was converted to plain text.

The developers have confirmed there is an issue.  Please don't
dispute,  What have I ever done to you?


what developers? No developers have been here to say anything about this.

When I send in html, I also receive in html, because I've got all my 
settings set correctly.  The problem is you don't, and we are *trying* 
to help you.


If you have the setting set to send in both html and plain text, then 
scroll down a bit, in View Source, and you'll see the html part.


Further, you need a few other settings:

To view, its: View, Message Body As, and Original HTML.

Also, you need: Edit, Mail & Newsgroups Accoung Settings, select the 
account, and under Composition and Addressing, at the top right you need 
to select "Compose messages in html format."


This is one of the downsides of SM and TB, you've got all these frakken 
various settings everywhere.




send me a message and I'll tell you if I received it in 
html or not.


--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Dear Mr. Potamus.  You should really View Message Source and you will
see what i mean.  I just sent myself an Email composed in HTML, and
having that setting you refer to set to HTML only.  Here's what I
received...
-
Subject: test
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is a test message
---
as you can see, it was converted to plain text.

The developers have confirmed there is an issue.  Please don't
dispute,  What have I ever done to you?


what developers? No developers have been here to say 
anything about this.


When I send in html, I also receive in html, because 
I've got all my settings set correctly.  The problem is 
you don't, and we are *trying* to help you.


If you have the setting set to send in both html and 
plain text, then scroll down a bit, in View Source, and 
you'll see the html part.


Further, you need a few other settings:

To view, its: View, Message Body As, and Original HTML.

Also, you need: Edit, Mail & Newsgroups Accoung 
Settings, select the account, and under Composition and 
Addressing, at the top right you need to select 
"Compose messages in html format."


This is one of the downsides of SM and TB, you've got 
all these frakken various settings everywhere.


--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Dear Mr. Potamus.  You should really View Message Source and you will
see what i mean.  I just sent myself an Email composed in HTML, and
having that setting you refer to set to HTML only.  Here's what I
received...
-
Subject: test
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is a test message
---
as you can see, it was converted to plain text.

The developers have confirmed there is an issue.  Please don't
dispute,  What have I ever done to you?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Thanks Peter - that's indeed an option, for, as posted "when sending
formatted messages and one or more recipients are not listed as being
able to receive HTML".  However, if you don't fill in any HTML or
PlainText Domains, then, regardless of which of the 4 settings you
choose from that menu, Seamonkey will STILL convert messages composed
in HTML to plain text if it doesn't see any reason to leave them in
HTML.  Try it yourself.   I'm sorry to be getting testy, but this
thread started with an affirmation of the problems, and an agreement
from developers that it existed.  It continues with, no offense, over
a dozen armchair, foundationless "oh, I don't think that's really a
problem" postings, that I then have to respond to so that the
developers are assured there is an issue here, which there surely
is.

Guys,  really, my apologies for pushing back, but regardless of what
settings you pick, on any menu, SM will convert Email composed in HTML
to plain text if there is nothing in the message that makes it think
it has to use HTML, unless, on a per message basis, you select options-

format-> rich text.


All I'm asking is for an option (even just an about: setting) that
disables the conversion,and sends HTML messages in HTML all the time.

Thanks for listening, and sorry to be grouchy
/j


no, you're wrong on that account.  If you select one of 
those settings, then it will be sent as html regardless 
if you have the receiver set to receive plain text or 
html. This will over-ride any and all settings you 
have. You don't even need to add domains.


If you have the setting selected as send html 
regardless, then thats exactly what will be sent.  If 
you have send in html and plain text selected, then 
thats exactly what will be sent, a message in both html 
and plain text. Thats the setting I have and I've never 
had a problem whatsoever.


--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Thanks Peter - that's indeed an option, for, as posted "when sending
formatted messages and one or more recipients are not listed as being
able to receive HTML".  However, if you don't fill in any HTML or
PlainText Domains, then, regardless of which of the 4 settings you
choose from that menu, Seamonkey will STILL convert messages composed
in HTML to plain text if it doesn't see any reason to leave them in
HTML.  Try it yourself.   I'm sorry to be getting testy, but this
thread started with an affirmation of the problems, and an agreement
from developers that it existed.  It continues with, no offense, over
a dozen armchair, foundationless "oh, I don't think that's really a
problem" postings, that I then have to respond to so that the
developers are assured there is an issue here, which there surely
is.

Guys,  really, my apologies for pushing back, but regardless of what
settings you pick, on any menu, SM will convert Email composed in HTML
to plain text if there is nothing in the message that makes it think
it has to use HTML, unless, on a per message basis, you select options-
>format-> rich text.

All I'm asking is for an option (even just an about: setting) that
disables the conversion,and sends HTML messages in HTML all the time.

Thanks for listening, and sorry to be grouchy
/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Yes Ray - that option is there - Feel free to set it.  I have mine
set.  Doesn't make any difference.  Seamonkey will STILL convert your
messages to plain text when it thinks it's appropriate.  So if you
want to be sure that you send in HTML, you MUST do something for EACH
Email.  This is well documented in the thread I refer to at the top of
this discussion.

Not sure why so many people want to insist, without checking, that
there isn't a problem.   strange... 8-}

On Mar 25, 6:47 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

I work with SM 1.1.14.
On my mail account - View Settings for this account - Composition &
Adressing - I have the option "Compose messages in HTML format "SET".
So there is no need to do something for each mail sent.



no, you're missing one setting: Edit, Preferences, Mail & Newsgroups, 
Send Format, and at the top right, select either the 3rd or 4th setting.




Thanks Peter ! That point should be the problem ... i have set "Ask me - 
what to do" :-)

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Yes Ray - that option is there - Feel free to set it.  I have mine
set.  Doesn't make any difference.  Seamonkey will STILL convert your
messages to plain text when it thinks it's appropriate.  So if you
want to be sure that you send in HTML, you MUST do something for EACH
Email.  This is well documented in the thread I refer to at the top of
this discussion.

Not sure why so many people want to insist, without checking, that
there isn't a problem.   strange... 8-}

On Mar 25, 6:47 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

I work with SM 1.1.14.
On my mail account - View Settings for this account - Composition &
Adressing - I have the option "Compose messages in HTML format "SET".
So there is no need to do something for each mail sent.



no, you're missing one setting: Edit, Preferences, Mail 
& Newsgroups, Send Format, and at the top right, select 
either the 3rd or 4th setting.


--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Yes Ray - that option is there - Feel free to set it.  I have mine
set.  Doesn't make any difference.  Seamonkey will STILL convert your
messages to plain text when it thinks it's appropriate.  So if you
want to be sure that you send in HTML, you MUST do something for EACH
Email.  This is well documented in the thread I refer to at the top of
this discussion.

Not sure why so many people want to insist, without checking, that
there isn't a problem.   strange... 8-}

On Mar 25, 6:47 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:
> I work with SM 1.1.14.
> On my mail account - View Settings for this account - Composition &
> Adressing - I have the option "Compose messages in HTML format "SET".
> So there is no need to do something for each mail sent.
>
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

I work with SM 1.1.14.
On my mail account - View Settings for this account - Composition & 
Adressing - I have the option "Compose messages in HTML format "SET".

So there is no need to do something for each mail sent.

In addition, when in mail -> Options -> Format -> is by default set to 
Auto-Detect.


googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

I only wish I could.  The only way to do this requires me to do
Options -> Format -> Rich Text
EVERY TIME I send an email.

If i just write an email, and send it.  The conversion is automatic,
unheralded, and unstoppable.

Just a suggestion - read the top of the thread before you reply - it's
all up there.

thanks!
/j


On Mar 24, 7:18 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Again - Please!  a way to turn off auto-conversion to plaintext.

Why not view and send in html ?
So there is no conversion to plaintextinvolved.



___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

I only wish I could.  The only way to do this requires me to do
Options -> Format -> Rich Text
EVERY TIME I send an email.

If i just write an email, and send it.  The conversion is automatic,
unheralded, and unstoppable.

Just a suggestion - read the top of the thread before you reply - it's
all up there.

thanks!
/j


On Mar 24, 7:18 pm, Ray_Net 
wrote:
> googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> > Again - Please!  a way to turn off auto-conversion to plaintext.
>
> Why not view and send in html ?
> So there is no conversion to plaintextinvolved.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Ray_Net]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:


Again - Please!  a way to turn off auto-conversion to plain text.


Why not view and send in html ?
So there is no conversion to plain text involved.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

I'm sorry - my prior response was incorrect, I misread Lee's message

Hi Lee - What you propose does not in any way solve my problem.  No
matter what I select in that window, SM will still convert all
messages to plain text that it thinks can be converted to plain text.
The setting in Preferences has no effect on this autoconversion
process.  (Try it!)

Thanks though - (Although personally I'd like to think that if there
was that easy a solution I would have had the intelligence to find it
before posting this thread).

Again - Please!  a way to turn off auto-conversion to plain text.
thanks!
/j


> Edit>>Preferences>>Mail & Newsgroups
>
> Look in Send Format.
>
> You can make your preferred selection there.
>
> Lee

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Yes Lee, I can.  But I'm a bit tired of having to do Options -> Format
-> Send

for -every- single email that I send.

That's why I'm politely requesting the option  "disable auto-
conversion to plain text".

Thanks! 8-}
/j

> Look in Send Format.
>
> You can make your preferred selection there.
>
> Lee

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Leonidas Jones]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

I agree with Mr. Barclay, but there is much to do and only so much
free labor.  So I limit my request to simply providing an option to
turn off the "I think you should send plain text, so I will convert it
for you" feature.

/j


Perhaps there's some lynx or links2 code that could be used in SeaMonkey to
create thetextrendition of HTML messages.

Daniel
--
(Plaintextsometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft Exchange.) [F]




Edit>>Preferences>>Mail & Newsgroups

Look in Send Format.

You can make your preferred selection there.

Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

I agree with Mr. Barclay, but there is much to do and only so much
free labor.  So I limit my request to simply providing an option to
turn off the "I think you should send plain text, so I will convert it
for you" feature.

/j

>
> Perhaps there's some lynx or links2 code that could be used in SeaMonkey to
> create thetextrendition of HTML messages.
>
> Daniel
> --
> (Plaintextsometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft Exchange.) [F]

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Barclay, Daniel]

JeffM wrote:
> google00@ kwcpa.com wrote:
>> SM converts from HTML to Plain Text BADLY.  ...
>>
...
>> ...I ... look at what SM sent out,
>> and it's HORRIBLE!  The paragraphs are all run-on to each other,
>> lines are randomly broken etc.
> 
> Patient:  Doctor, It hurts when I do this. (Raises arm.)
> Groucho (wearing white coat and stethoscope):  Don't do that.

Sounds like an incompetent doctor (and an excessively snarky response).

If you can't do things you _should_ be able to do, then your trying to do
it is _not_ the problem (and the real solution isn't to just stop trying to
do it).

SeaMonkey _should_ do a reasonable job rendering HTML into text.  If it
doesn't, it's not the fault of a user who composes in HTML.


Perhaps there's some lynx or links2 code that could be used in SeaMonkey to
create the text rendition of HTML messages.


Daniel
-- 
(Plain text sometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft Exchange.) [F]

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

On Mar 16, 4:02 pm, Bill Davidsen  wrote:
>  See the original threads I quoted.  What I am asking for,
> > which is
>
> > Disable automatic conversion to plantext.
>
> So the message will be readable by all the mail agents which handle HTML but 
> not
> plaintext?
>
> Why do you care? I assume there is some benefit I'm missing...
>

Hi Mr. Davidsen - I care because when SM converts to plain text - it
corrupts the message.  Paragraph breaks are removed and text is
wrapped oddly.

HTH 8-}
Thanks guys!
/j
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Bill Davidsen]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Mr Gehr - that option is there, and does the opposite of what I want
it to do.  Not choosing that option does not keep SM from converting
my message.  See the original threads I quoted.  What I am asking for,
which is

Disable automatic conversion to plan text.

So the message will be readable by all the mail agents which handle HTML but not 
plain text?


Why do you care? I assume there is some benefit I'm missing...


Is NOT a current option anywhere in SM.

Thanks very much
/j


Has 2.0 removed:
   Edit->Preferences->E-Mail_and_NewsGroups->Send_Format->...
and then pick the radial [second option from the top]:
 "Convertthe message to plaintext(some formatting may be lost)"
I've always used this an never had a problem.





--
Bill Davidsen 
  "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Mr Gehr - that option is there, and does the opposite of what I want
it to do.  Not choosing that option does not keep SM from converting
my message.  See the original threads I quoted.  What I am asking for,
which is

Disable automatic conversion to plan text.

Is NOT a current option anywhere in SM.

Thanks very much
/j

>
> Has 2.0 removed:
>Edit->Preferences->E-Mail_and_NewsGroups->Send_Format->...
> and then pick the radial [second option from the top]:
>  "Convertthe message to plaintext(some formatting may be lost)"
> I've always used this an never had a problem.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Carl Gehr]

On 03/13/09 09:54 am, googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

Mr. Hansen - I don't think you're following.

In order to "don't do that", I have to go Options->Format->Rich (HTML)
Text, for -every- message.  I believe that SM starts with each message
set to HTML, but after I click Send, I believe SM reviews the message
and decides whether to convert to Plain Text.  All I want SM's busy
crew to do is give me an option to disable that automatic
conversion.


Has 2.0 removed:
  Edit->Preferences->E-Mail_and_NewsGroups->Send_Format->...
and then pick the radial [second option from the top]:
"Convert the message to plain text (some formatting may be lost)"
I've always used this an never had a problem.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

Mr. Hansen - I don't think you're following.

In order to "don't do that", I have to go Options->Format->Rich (HTML)
Text, for -every- message.  I believe that SM starts with each message
set to HTML, but after I click Send, I believe SM reviews the message
and decides whether to convert to Plain Text.  All I want SM's busy
crew to do is give me an option to disable that automatic
conversion.

Peter P - I agree, all I want to do is compose and send in HTML -by
default-.

Thanks very much
/j


>
> Patient:  Doctor, It hurts when I do this. (Raises arm.)
> Groucho (wearing white coat and stethoscope):  Don't do that.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[JeffM]

google00@ kwcpa.com wrote:
>SM converts from HTML to Plain Text BADLY.  Take my word for it.
>Biggest problem is that paragraph breaks are reduced,
>eliminating blank line between paragraphs.
>Text also sometimes wraps improperly
>(Newlines appear in the middle of lines).
>
>So i compose in HTML by default.  I look at what I composed in HTML.
>I like what I see (i.e., format is correct).  and I hit SEND.
>Then I go into my Sent folder, and look at what SM sent out,
>and it's HORRIBLE!  The paragraphs are all run-on to each other,
>lines are randomly broken etc.

Patient:  Doctor, It hurts when I do this. (Raises arm.)
Groucho (wearing white coat and stethoscope):  Don't do that.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Mark Hansen]

On 03/12/09 14:07, googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:
> 
> All I'm asking for is a general setting (on the about: page) that
> disables auto-conversion.  I would ask to have the conversion fixed,
> but that seems like more work and you guys work too hard already.  How
> hard is it to just SEND the HTML that was composed?
> 

Can't you go to Edit -> Preferences -> Mail & Newsgroups -> Send Format
and adjust the settings there so your mail is sent in HTML format?

However, what are your recipients going to do when they can't (or aren't
willing to) accept HTML?

For example, I don't read e-mail in HTML format. If you were to send me
a message containing only HTML, I would delete it.

Best Regards,
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo]

googl...@kwcpa.com wrote:

"I don't know if SM converts from html to plain text badly or not,
but,
if it does convert badly, wouldn't that be an even better reason to
NOT
send in htlm so that there is no conversion necessary??? "

SM converts from HTML to Plain Text BADLY.  Take my word for it.
Biggest problem is that paragraph breaks are reduced, eliminating
blank line between paragraphs.  Text also sometimes wraps improperly
(Newlines appear in the middle of lines).

So i compose in HTML by default.  I look at what I composed in HTML.
I like what I see (i.e., format is correct).  and I hit SEND.  Then I
go into my Sent folder, and look at what SM sent out, and it's
HORRIBLE!  The paragraphs are all run-on to each other, lines are
randomly broken etc.

This is a BAD thing.

Yes, I could COMPOSE in plain text, but that is a less convenient
thing to do.  I have to manually wrap my lines, and I can't use an
easy-to-read font (for composition).

All I'm asking for is a general setting (on the about: page) that
disables auto-conversion.  I would ask to have the conversion fixed,
but that seems like more work and you guys work too hard already.  How
hard is it to just SEND the HTML that was composed?

Thanks very much - looking forward to SM 2.0!
/j




you just proved the point for the opposite: its better 
to view and send in html


--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email 
help Emails to me may become public


Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech 
Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, 
except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org 
newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned.


Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[google00]

"I don't know if SM converts from html to plain text badly or not,
but,
if it does convert badly, wouldn't that be an even better reason to
NOT
send in htlm so that there is no conversion necessary??? "

SM converts from HTML to Plain Text BADLY.  Take my word for it.
Biggest problem is that paragraph breaks are reduced, eliminating
blank line between paragraphs.  Text also sometimes wraps improperly
(Newlines appear in the middle of lines).

So i compose in HTML by default.  I look at what I composed in HTML.
I like what I see (i.e., format is correct).  and I hit SEND.  Then I
go into my Sent folder, and look at what SM sent out, and it's
HORRIBLE!  The paragraphs are all run-on to each other, lines are
randomly broken etc.

This is a BAD thing.

Yes, I could COMPOSE in plain text, but that is a less convenient
thing to do.  I have to manually wrap my lines, and I can't use an
easy-to-read font (for composition).

All I'm asking for is a general setting (on the about: page) that
disables auto-conversion.  I would ask to have the conversion fixed,
but that seems like more work and you guys work too hard already.  How
hard is it to just SEND the HTML that was composed?

Thanks very much - looking forward to SM 2.0!
/j


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[Daniel]

nore...@invalid.com wrote:

Answer - when Seamonkey converts to plain text it does so BADLY.
Most paragraph breaks are removed (no blank line between paragraphs) and
sometimes lines are broken at odd boundaries.  I think there are explainable
anomalies for this behavior, but either SM needs a much better converter,
or give us the -option- to turn it off.

THANKS!
/j


keith_w wrote:


 > What I find hard to understand is, why do people insist in composing simple
 > text MAIL messages in html? Doesn't plain text ASCII adequately transmit
 > sense and purpose to the message?
 > One can underline and italicize for emphasis, if that's what one wants...
 > what more is needed?
 > No, I mean, really needed?
 >
 > keith whaley

You might want to post this to the newsgroup / list... ;-)

Greetings,

Jens



Am I misunderstanding something here??

Keith asks why do people insist on sending what should be simple text 
messages as HTML, and /j says that SeaMonkey converts to plain text badly.


I don't know if SM converts from html to plain text badly or not, but, 
if it does convert badly, wouldn't that be an even better reason to NOT 
send in htlm so that there is no conversion necessary???


Daniel
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Request for Seamonkey 2.0

[noreply]

Answer - when Seamonkey converts to plain text it does so BADLY.
Most paragraph breaks are removed (no blank line between paragraphs) and
sometimes lines are broken at odd boundaries.  I think there are explainable
anomalies for this behavior, but either SM needs a much better converter,
or give us the -option- to turn it off.

THANKS!
/j


keith_w wrote:

> 
>  > What I find hard to understand is, why do people insist in composing simple
>  > text MAIL messages in html? Doesn't plain text ASCII adequately transmit
>  > sense and purpose to the message?
>  > One can underline and italicize for emphasis, if that's what one wants...
>  > what more is needed?
>  > No, I mean, really needed?
>  >
>  > keith whaley
> 
> You might want to post this to the newsgroup / list... ;-)
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Jens
> 
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey