Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 at 19:21:27 -0500, Dwight wrote: On Saturday, June 13, 2009, 2:54:10 PM, Marek Mikus wrote: SETHEADER works here on XP, but not on Vista. and yes, the syntax is the same on both machines. Works on Vista for me - exactly the same syntax as I had running until recently on XP. -- Robin Using The Bat! v4.1.11 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6002 Service Pack 2 Popfile v1.1.0 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hallo Dwight, On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:21:27 -0500GMT (16-6-2009, 2:21 +0200, where I live), you wrote: DAC SETHEADER works here on XP, but not on Vista. and yes, the syntax is DAC the same on both machines. Did you define the header you wanted to set in the account on the Vista PC? -- Groetjes, Roelof this copy of me has been unregistered for more than 42 years. http://www.voormijalleen.nl/ The Bat! 4.2.6 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6001 Service Pack 1 6 pop3 accounts, 1 imap account OTFE enabled Quad Core 2.4GHz 4 GB RAM pgplcQi5AAdpJ.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Tuesday, June 16, 2009, 6:06:43 AM, Roelof Otten wrote: DAC SETHEADER works here on XP, but not on Vista. and yes, the syntax is DAC the same on both machines. Did you define the header you wanted to set in the account on the Vista PC? to me, it looks the same as on my xp machine %SETHEADER(X-Rogue,:dcorrin:)%- AND it happens on both my desktop and my laptop. one is 32 bit the other 64. -- Dwight A. Corrin 316.303.9385 phone ahead to fax dcorrin at fastmail.fm photo galleries at http://dcorrin.smugmug.com photo blog at http://dcorrin.aminus3.com http://photos.vfxy.com/photoblogs/5882 Using IMAP with The Bat! 4.2.6 on Windows Vista version 6,0 (Service Pack 1) Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Tuesday, June 16, 2009, 1:24:55 AM, Robin Anson wrote: Works on Vista for me - exactly the same syntax as I had running until recently on XP. following is my reply template On %ODateEn, %OTimeLongEn, %OFROMNAME wrote: %SINGLERE %QUOTES %SETHEADER(X-Rogue,:dcorrin:)%- %Cursor I'm banking on the fact that you won't find the header if you read this message. -- Dwight A. Corrin 316.303.9385 phone ahead to fax dcorrin at fastmail.fm photo galleries at http://dcorrin.smugmug.com photo blog at http://dcorrin.aminus3.com http://photos.vfxy.com/photoblogs/5882 Using IMAP with The Bat! 4.2.6 on Windows Vista version 6,0 (Service Pack 1) Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hallo Dwight, On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 07:23:04 -0500GMT (16-6-2009, 14:23 +0200, where I live), you wrote: DAC SETHEADER works here on XP, but not on Vista. and yes, the syntax is DAC the same on both machines. Did you define the header you wanted to set in the account on the Vista PC? DAC to me, it looks the same as on my xp machine DAC %SETHEADER(X-Rogue,:dcorrin:)%- That's not what I meant. Did you define the X-Rogue header at Options - Preferences - Viewer/Editor - Message Headers? DAC it happens on both my desktop and my laptop. one is 32 bit the other DAC 64. As you can see, it's working just fine at my Vista 64 desktop. -- Groetjes, Roelof Devoted to the art of cat-bathing as a martial art. http://www.voormijalleen.nl/ The Bat! 4.2.6 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6001 Service Pack 1 6 pop3 accounts, 1 imap account OTFE enabled Quad Core 2.4GHz 4 GB RAM pgpmQfwAPySOl.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Tuesday, June 16, 2009, 7:38:36 AM, Roelof Otten wrote: That's not what I meant. Did you define the X-Rogue header at Options - Preferences - Viewer/Editor - Message Headers? who remembers all of what they did to make things on a computer 4 or 5 years ago, to switch? :blush: -- Dwight A. Corrin 316.303.9385 phone ahead to fax dcorrin at fastmail.fm photo galleries at http://dcorrin.smugmug.com photo blog at http://dcorrin.aminus3.com http://photos.vfxy.com/photoblogs/5882 Using IMAP with The Bat! 4.2.6 on Windows Vista version 6,0 () Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Saturday, June 13, 2009, 2:54:10 PM, Marek Mikus wrote: no, ADDHEADER adds value to header, while SETHEADER changes header, there is no bug here. SETHEADER works here on XP, but not on Vista. and yes, the syntax is the same on both machines. -- Dwight A. Corrin 316.303.9385 phone ahead to fax dcorrin at fastmail.fm photo galleries at http://dcorrin.smugmug.com photo blog at http://dcorrin.aminus3.com http://photos.vfxy.com/photoblogs/5882 Using IMAP with The Bat! 4.2.6 on Windows Vista version 6,0 () Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hello Arjan, On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 00:31:38 +0200 GMT (14/Jun/09, 5:31 +0700 GMT), Arjan de Groot wrote: You can not change Message-ID and there is no need to change In-Reply-To header which includes Message-ID of replied message. AdG Let's not go nit-picking over which headers need changing or not. Too late. AdG (X-Rogue is a header that doesn't need adding or changing, because it AdG is only used by or interesting for a very small minority of Beta! AdG users, who, in turn, represent only a very small minority of the total AdG e-mailing population.) No, we are the majority. And we side with the smiley-fraction. This is far more important than IMAP and all that modern crap. Replying to HTML correctly - who needs that, apart from a few professionals? They are clearly the minority. Let's keep promoting the ban of HTML emails - there are even nice smiley ribbons to go with it. Let's stay in the last century, it was so nice, wasn't it? -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.1.11 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hello all, Sunday, June 14, 2009, Arjan de Groot wrote: You can not change Message-ID and there is no need to change In-Reply-To header which includes Message-ID of replied message. Let's not go nit-picking over which headers need changing or not. You wrote examples and I am telling You, these are bad samples, because such headers are internal and must conform RFC. If You need to change headers with dash, use %SETHEADER or %ADDHEADER. (X-Rogue is a header that doesn't need adding or changing, because it is only used by or interesting for a very small minority of Beta! users, who, in turn, represent only a very small minority of the total e-mailing population.) how You can tell this, if You are here six months only? No offense, but I really do not understand your arguments. I don't know what You really want, but developers will not remove any macro in future versions regarding to backward compatibility. I only want some clarity. Which macro I do have to use in what situation. Like I said, I've grown tired of experimenting, using my Arjan, template and macro system is extended for 12 years and for now, there are almost 250 internal and more then 270 external macros available (by additional plugins). I understand You, that some macros could be obsolete, but they are not removed for backward compatibility. If You want examples, You can see them here: http://cgi.silverstones.com/library.php I am trying to document all available macros including all internal and external macros with description and samples and this is very hard task, trust me. -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 4.2.6 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 with MyMacros,XMP,AnotherMacros, AntispamSniper v 3.2.0.6 Notebook Toshiba, Core2 Duo 1.83 GHz, 4 GB RAM Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 18:00:37 +0200, Marek Mikus wrote: Let's not go nit-picking over which headers need changing or not. You wrote examples and I am telling You, these are bad samples, because such headers are internal and must conform RFC. I agree. Reply-To would have been a better example. If You need to change headers with dash, use %SETHEADER or %ADDHEADER. That's clear now. So hopefully we can now agree that the Note in the Message Headers Setup Window is giving wrong (or inaccurate) information. (X-Rogue is a header that doesn't need adding or changing, because it is only used by or interesting for a very small minority of Beta! users, who, in turn, represent only a very small minority of the total e-mailing population.) how You can tell this, if You are here six months only? No offense, but I really do not understand your arguments. It was a little joke, meant to emphasize that lots of header names have dashes. And I've been here for a little bit longer than six months. Seven years comes closer. I've started with TB! v 1.4x and have been on the TB! mailing lists ever since. If You want examples, You can see them here: http://cgi.silverstones.com/library.php I am trying to document all available macros including all internal and external macros with description and samples and this is very hard task, trust me. Thanks very much. You're a great help and a very nice fellow list member (and I really mean that!). Arjan -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:15:38 +0200, Marek Mikus wrote: What wonders me is why there are three different macro's (two of which don't seem to work properly) that arguably serve the same purpose. Typical known redundancy :-) %HDRheader returns current message header %HDRheader=text and %ADDHEADER adds header or adds text to existing header %SETHEADER changes existing header I see no typical redundant macro like %POSTPONE and %DELAY, where %DELAY was kept to have backward compatibility I have re-examined the help file but I still fail to see the relevance of the %HDR macro's. Lots of regular RFC headers have a - in them (Like Message-ID and In-Reply-To) and a macro that can't handle it seems to be a bit superfluous. What's more, refering to them in the Header Definition Window is IMHO plain misleading because it leads users into the wrong direction. The function of the %ADDHeader macro is clear to me now. But I think the name is a bit misleading (ADDTOHeader should have been more apt) and I consider the double Value I encountered to be a bug. Arjan -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Sat, 2009-06-13, Arjan de Groot wrote: I have re-examined the help file but I still fail to see the relevance of the %HDR macro's. Lots of regular RFC headers have a - in them (Like Message-ID and In-Reply-To) and a macro that can't handle it seems to be a bit superfluous. My guess is that the %HDR macros were the first attempt to allow this capabiity, but when it was discovered that the parser couldn't handle an embedded - the %ADDHEADER and %SETHEADER macros were created which used a quoted string for the header name so that the parser would allow the - character. The %HDR macros woere left in for backward compatibility. The function of the %ADDHeader macro is clear to me now. But I think the name is a bit misleading (ADDTOHeader should have been more apt) and I consider the double Value I encountered to be a bug. I agree that the %ADDHEADER should have been called %ADDTOHEADER. The doubling of the Value is a side-effect of the way that macros are executed during the editing process (twice). This is the reason for the %MODIFYONCE macro. In this case you could use %MODIFYONCE(User-Agent) at the beginning of your template. However, %SETHEADER would also work by creating the same User-Agent header twice. -- Bill McQuillan bill.mcquil...@pobox.com Using The Bat! 2.11 on Windows XP 5.1 build 2600-Service Pack 2 Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 09:07:42 -0700, Bill McQuillan wrote: My guess is that the %HDR macros were the first attempt to allow this capabiity, but when it was discovered that the parser couldn't handle an embedded - the %ADDHEADER and %SETHEADER macros were created which used a quoted string for the header name so that the parser would allow the - character. The %HDR macros woere left in for backward compatibility. If this is the case, the %HDR macro should never have been allowed to survive the (Beta) test phase in the first place. Its flaw is very very easy to spot. If some basic testing had been done it would never have made it into the following public release version. The doubling of the Value is a side-effect of the way that macros are executed during the editing process (twice). This is the reason for the %MODIFYONCE macro. In this case you could use %MODIFYONCE(User-Agent) at the beginning of your template. However, %SETHEADER would also work by creating the same User-Agent header twice. Thanks for explaining. %Setheader will do nicely for me. In my early Beta! days I did a lot of testing messing around with all kinds of macro's and templates but nowadays I've grown tired of it. Arjan -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hello all, Saturday, June 13, 2009, Arjan de Groot wrote: I have re-examined the help file but I still fail to see the relevance of the %HDR macro's. Lots of regular RFC headers have a - in them (Like Message-ID and In-Reply-To) and a macro that can't handle it seems to be a bit superfluous. What's more, refering to them in the Header Definition Window is IMHO plain misleading because it leads users into the wrong direction. You can not change Message-ID and there is no need to change In-Reply-To header which includes Message-ID of replied message. I don't know what You really want, but developers will not remove any macro in future versions regarding to backward compatibility. The function of the %ADDHeader macro is clear to me now. But I think the name is a bit misleading (ADDTOHeader should have been more apt) and I consider the double Value I encountered to be a bug. no, ADDHEADER adds value to header, while SETHEADER changes header, there is no bug here. -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 4.2.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 with MyMacros,XMP,AnotherMacros, AntispamSniper v 3.2.0.6 Notebook Toshiba, Core2 Duo 1.83 GHz, 4 GB RAM Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hello all, Saturday, June 13, 2009, Arjan de Groot wrote: My guess is that the %HDR macros were the first attempt to allow this capabiity, but when it was discovered that the parser couldn't handle an embedded - the %ADDHEADER and %SETHEADER macros were created which used a quoted string for the header name so that the parser would allow the - character. The %HDR macros woere left in for backward compatibility. If this is the case, the %HDR macro should never have been allowed to survive the (Beta) test phase in the first place. Its flaw is very very easy to spot. If some basic testing had been done it would never have made it into the following public release version. it is known that %HDR macro doesn't allow special chars and this note is included in help. -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 4.2.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 with MyMacros,XMP,AnotherMacros, AntispamSniper v 3.2.0.6 Notebook Toshiba, Core2 Duo 1.83 GHz, 4 GB RAM Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On zaterdag 13 juni 2009, 9:54:10 PM Marek Mikus wrote, You can not change Message-ID and there is no need to change In-Reply-To header which includes Message-ID of replied message. Let's not go nit-picking over which headers need changing or not. (X-Rogue is a header that doesn't need adding or changing, because it is only used by or interesting for a very small minority of Beta! users, who, in turn, represent only a very small minority of the total e-mailing population.) I don't know what You really want, but developers will not remove any macro in future versions regarding to backward compatibility. I only want some clarity. Which macro I do have to use in what situation. Like I said, I've grown tired of experimenting, using my own mail-server as a guinea pig and trying to decypher mysterious, incorrect or out-dated help texts. Toying around with macro's and templates used to be fun with versions 1.xx, but not anymore. This whole current macro business in TB! is just too muddled, badly documented and unnecessary complicated to be really useful for me. The function of the %ADDHeader macro is clear to me now. But I think the name is a bit misleading (ADDTOHeader should have been more apt) and I consider the double Value I encountered to be a bug. no, ADDHEADER adds value to header, Yes, although it would be better worded like this: ADDHEADER _appends_ value TO header. Still, there should be some better explanation in the help file on how or when to use this macro. while SETHEADER changes header, there is no bug here. Setheader works just fine. I don't think I will need the other ones. Arjan -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On Saturday June 13 2009, 9:57:51 PM Marek Mikus wrote, it is known that %HDR macro doesn't allow special chars and this note is included in help. I've been wondering about that. What is meant by special characters? Does there exist A Definition Of special characters? I don't know. Personally I think special characters are characters that are not in the ASCII (0-127) table, but that's open for argument. IMVHO the help text should be very clear about which characters are allowed and which are not. Anyway, any macro with such (very) limited usefulness like that of %HDR should be eradicated and transferred to Non Documented status As Soon As Possible (IMVHO, of course). Arjan -- [Winamp now playing: Jason Lytle -- Furget It] Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
On vrijdag 12 juni 2009, 1:02:20 AM Marek Mikus wrote, I think this might be a bug in the %HDR macro but I'm not absolutely sure. Maybe it needs some extra ()'s or s to make it work. I don't know. no, this macro doesn't allow dash, use %ADDHEADER(RFC Name,Value) instead. I tried using that, but it returned Value twice (See the User-Agent header in this message. There is a macro that works though. I found it on the PCWize Website, in the instructions on setting up an X-Rogue. The syntax is the same: %SetHeader(RFC-Name,Value). What wonders me is why there are three different macro's (two of which don't seem to work properly) that arguably serve the same purpose. Arjan -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Freitag, 12. Juni 2009 at 23:36, Arjan de Groot wrote: What wonders me is why there are three different macro's (two of which don't seem to work properly) that arguably serve the same purpose. Typical known redundancy :-) -- With kind Regards Jens Franik mailto:je...@gmx.de Picture of me? X-Rogue http://www.de2all.de/Kr_bat.jpg The Bat! 4.2.1.1 + AntiSpamSniper 3.2.0.6 + Gaijin XMP Makro Plugin 1.1.91.0 Windows XP 5.1 build 2600 Service Pack 2 AMD Athlon Dual Core 4850e 2,50 GHz, 4 GB RAM - Debian Lenny + Windows XP @VirtualBox 2.2.4 r47978 non-OSE 8 POP3 Accounts - 1 IMAP - 120 Folders Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hello Jens, What wonders me is why there are three different macro's (two of which don't seem to work properly) that arguably serve the same purpose. Typical known redundancy :-) Nope. Read the definitions in Help. 'Add text' is not the same than 'Replace text'. -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain) Using The Bat! v4.2.4 My photos at: http://www.Rancho-K.com My photoblog: http://mau.aminus3.com Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hello all, Saturday, June 13, 2009, Jens Franik wrote: What wonders me is why there are three different macro's (two of which don't seem to work properly) that arguably serve the same purpose. Typical known redundancy :-) %HDRheader returns current message header %HDRheader=text and %ADDHEADER adds header or adds text to existing header %SETHEADER changes existing header I see no typical redundant macro like %POSTPONE and %DELAY, where %DELAY was kept to have backward compatibility -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 4.2.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 with MyMacros,XMP,AnotherMacros, AntispamSniper v 3.2.0.6 Notebook Toshiba, Core2 Duo 1.83 GHz, 4 GB RAM Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with %HDR macro
Hello all, Friday, June 12, 2009, Arjan de Groot wrote: When trying to use this macro there is however a problem. If there is a - in the header's RFC name (like in User-Agent) it doesn't work. For example, if I put %HDRUser-Agent='The Beta!' in a template, my message-body (literally) starts with -Agent='The Beta!' and the User-Agent header stays empty. I think this might be a bug in the %HDR macro but I'm not absolutely sure. Maybe it needs some extra ()'s or s to make it work. I don't know. no, this macro doesn't allow dash, use %ADDHEADER(RFC Name,Value) instead. -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 4.2.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 with MyMacros,XMP,AnotherMacros, AntispamSniper v 3.2.0.6 Notebook Toshiba, Core2 Duo 1.83 GHz, 4 GB RAM Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
