Re: Mod: Cut mark (was: Wish: HTML inline forwarding)
Hello Marck, A reminder of what Marck D Pearlstone typed on: 10 November 2004 at 22:31:24 GMT +0100 MDP Please include a signature delimiter in your messages. Not arguing here or trying to start a revolution or siding with anyone so please don't feel singled out Marck, I'm just curious... :) He doesn't appear to use a signature at all so why the need for a delimiter? The part you quoted is added at the server end, not by the sender of the message. I can understand the obligatory use of a delimiter when actually using a signature but when you don't? -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 11/11/2004 at 08:04 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Mod: Cut mark (was: Wish: HTML inline forwarding)
Hallo Tony, On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:12:37 +GMT (11-11-2004, 9:12 +0100, where I live), you wrote: TB I can understand the obligatory use of a delimiter when actually using TB a signature but when you don't? Because of the list footer. We can't add a signature delimiter to the list footer, because that would mean that for the rest of us our own signature delimiter would be invalid since TB uses only the last one. -- Groetjes, Roelof Say it with flowers. Give her a Triffid The Bat! 3.0.2.6 Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 1 pop3 account, server on LAN pgpSJBaC5D7qJ.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello Alexander, A reminder of what Alexander S. Kunz typed on: 10 November 2004 at 07:58:01 GMT +0100 ASK When I redirect a message I want it to appear exactly as ASK it was, and not as a clumsy .eml or .msg attachment to a plain text ASK mail. There must be something wrong with my setup then. I redirected a html formatted solicitors letter to my Wife yesterday and the only attachment she received was the word document. Everything else was exactly as I received it. no eml or msg attachments at all. -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 10/11/2004 at 08:46 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello Tony Boom everyone else on 10-Nov-2004 at 09:51:27 (GMT +0100), you wrote: ASK When I redirect a message I want it to appear exactly as it was, and ASK not as a clumsy .eml or .msg attachment to a plain text mail. There must be something wrong with my setup then. Wrong? Well... :-) I redirected a html formatted solicitors letter to my Wife yesterday and the only attachment she received was the word document. Everything else was exactly as I received it. no eml or msg attachments at all. Was that message HTML only? Maybe thats a clue, I haven't tried that. I just tried this: sent myself a message in HTML format (it has a text part, too). But - no matter what I do (alternative or normal forward, redirect), I end up with the MicroEd the message as attachment (.eml in the case of alternative forward, message.html + inline images when using normal forward/redirect). I then changed the default editor to HTML only - I still end up with the original message (plus included images) as attachments. Whats worse, when I open the attached message.html, its missing the included picture (of course) - because that is in a separate attachment after forwarding... -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) using v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2 Dilbert's Words of Wisdom: I don't have an attitude problem. You have a perception problem. Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello Alexander, Tuesday (November 9, 2004, 11:59 AM) you wrote: ASK as discussed on TBUDL (see subj.): ASK https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4036 Because of the apparent lack of clarity in the other branch of this thread, I would like to reiterate and clarify this request. In popular e-mail clients, when you in-line forward or reply to an HTML message the formatting of the original message remains in tack. In TB!, the in-line formatting of the message is lost. IMHO, TB! has it wrong here and this likely confuses and frustrates new users used to popular e-mail clients. Further, it frustrates me because I too would like to forward an HTML formatted e-mail with my comments, but I am not able to, without destroying the HTML formatting. While I am ranting, I cannot find an option, in common folders, to turn off Forward message as mime attachment. You must use Alternate Forward to get an in line forwarded message in common folders. Can anyone confirm this. (I hope I do not get blasted for not starting a new thread with this?) -- Best regards, John Thomas Using The Bat! v3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello Alexander, A reminder of what Alexander S. Kunz typed on: 10 November 2004 at 17:13:02 GMT +0100 ASK Was that message HTML only? Maybe thats a clue, I haven't tried that. Ah, you never mentioned mixed content, just html. The message I tried it on after reading your post was from a Government agency who probably use OE and don't have the faintest idea what the difference is between text, html or brail. So yes, it was, apart from the word doc attachment, just html. Images on the other hand always seem to come through as attachments. Well have to have a play with this off list sometime and see just what we can get to happen. -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 10/11/2004 at 20:53 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello John, A reminder of what John Thomas typed on: 10 November 2004 at 21:43:55 GMT +0100 JT IMHO, TB! has it wrong here Problem is so many people on this and the other lists fought long and hard to keep html of any description out of TB! completely. So whatever html capability TB! has is a bonus whether wrong or right. I'm not saying I agree one way or t'other but that's how it was. -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 10/11/2004 at 21:02 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Tony Boom wrote: Problem is so many people on this and the other lists fought long and hard to keep html of any description out of TB! completely. So whatever html capability TB! has is a bonus whether wrong or right. I'm not saying I agree one way or t'other but that's how it was. Well, it *does* make sense not to use HTML. Given that most HTML rendering is done by the MS-supplied DLLs (maybe TB! has it's own, I do not know), I am really, really, not willing to see HTML-based e-mails... We are getting one exploit after the other on this... last one is the IFRAME. It is much prettier, and easy to read, I agree. I just wish MS had not completely blown HTML into a monster. In summary: HTML-based e-mail is not safe (and, by extension, Windows is also not safe). Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello hggdh everyone else on 10-Nov-2004 at 22:23:49 (GMT +0100), you wrote: Well, it *does* make sense not to use HTML. Given that most HTML rendering is done by the MS-supplied DLLs (maybe TB! has it's own, I do not know), I am really, really, not willing to see HTML-based e-mails... Neither do I - but there's the market: a modern competitive email client has to cover HTML and/or Rich Text. Happyshinyclickycolorish WinXP GUI people want a client that allows HTML so they can use backgrounds, different fonts, smilies gg and whatnot in their mails. ;-) And you I - we both have to deal with an HTML mail one day. Maybe. And on that day, it should work as expected (and I do not expect my mail client to blow an HTML message to pieces when forwarding/redirecting it), and thats what this thread is about. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) using v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2 The one time you lean back and relax is the time the boss walks by. Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Alexander S. Kunz wrote: And you I - we both have to deal with an HTML mail one day. Maybe. And on that day, it should work as expected (and I do not expect my mail client to blow an HTML message to pieces when forwarding/redirecting it), and thats what this thread is about. I stand corrected. You are, of course, right. It is, then, much more important that the HTML-rendering libraries be limited on what they can render... -- ..hggdh.., with a manual cut mark, since I have already eaten dinner with the magnificent forele blau Marck sent me :-) Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello everyone, as discussed on TBUDL (see subj.): https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4036 -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) using v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2 Deliplayer2 is playing: Alien Homes by Orichalcum The Deviant from the 1997 album 'Orichalcum The Deviant' Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello Alexander, A reminder of what Alexander S. Kunz typed on: 09 November 2004 at 20:58:51 GMT +0100 ASK Hello everyone, ASK as discussed on TBUDL (see subj.): ASK https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4036 Not too sure what you mean by this? I received a legal email today in html format with a word.doc attachment. I just forwarded it to another account and it arrived in exactly the same format, html and doc attachment except as you say the forward headers. Redirect works even better, it's absolutely identical in every way to the original minus any forward headers. -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 09/11/2004 at 20:08 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Wish: HTML inline forwarding
Hello Tony, Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 9:14:44 PM, you wrote: Redirect works even better, it's absolutely identical in every way to the original minus any forward headers. But no matter which you choose, forward or redirect, the original HTML message will *always* be an attachment, and not inline. When you forward a text message, you have the message in the editor (inline); when you forward HTML, you have an attachment. That *may* be OK for forwarding (but there should be an option to choose attach or inline, really), but it definitely is not for redirecting. When I redirect a message I want it to appear exactly as it was, and not as a clumsy .eml or .msg attachment to a plain text mail. -- Best regards, Alexandermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current beta is 3.0.2.6 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
