Re[2]: Cursor problem with V3

[WilWilWil]

==Original message text===
From: Paul Cartwright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: WilWilWil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sunday, September 26, 2004, 3:28:02 PM
Subject: Cursor problem with V3
PC> Hello expires30sept04,

PC> Sunday, September 26, 2004, 9:19:50 AM, you wrote:

>>> Since I've installed TB V3, my template who put the cursor at
>>> the end of an answer mail doesn't work. The cursor appears at
>>> the top of the editor ?

PC> I've had lots of problems with templates in V3. Did you remove those old
PC> files before you upgraded?? I think they were the *.spx ??
PC> or was it .srx ..
PC> and my AB templates stopped working too, only some.. weird..
PC> I think that problem may be my address template. I add all addresses
PC> from the TB lists to groups in my AB. I think one of those added names
PC> superceded my AB template for that person.



===End of original message text===
OK, i 've found the problem.

It is because I used microEd with V2 and now with V3 I use Html/PlainText
mail...

%cursor doesn't work with all mail format in TB3 !

-- 
WilWilWil


TB 3.0
Windows XP
Service Pack 1



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: Cursor problem with V3

[WilWilWil]

==Original message text===
From: Paul Cartwright 
To: WilWilWil 
Date: Sunday, September 26, 2004, 3:28:02 PM
Subject: Cursor problem with V3
PC> Hello expires30sept04,

PC> Sunday, September 26, 2004, 9:19:50 AM, you wrote:

>>> Since I've installed TB V3, my template who put the cursor at
>>> the end of an answer mail doesn't work. The cursor appears at
>>> the top of the editor ?

PC> I've had lots of problems with templates in V3. Did you remove those old
PC> files before you upgraded?? I think they were the *.spx ??
PC> or was it .srx ..
PC> and my AB templates stopped working too, only some.. weird..
PC> I think that problem may be my address template. I add all addresses
PC> from the TB lists to groups in my AB. I think one of those added names
PC> superceded my AB template for that person.



===End of original message text===
I ve just done this test : 

1 - Completely remove the template and close TB
2 - Make a new template with "%cursor" at the end.

I have the same problem : cursor at the wrong place !

-- 
WilWilWil


TB 3.0
Windows XP
Service Pack 1

Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: Cursor problem with V3

[WilWilWil]

==Original message text===
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: WilWilWil 
Date: Sunday, September 26, 2004, 3:19:50 PM
Subject: Cursor problem with V3
eycu> Hi

eycu> Tuesday, September 21, 2004, 11:45:00 PM, WilWilWil wrote:

>> IO,

>> Since I've installed TB V3, my template who put the cursor at
>> the end of an answer mail doesn't work. The cursor appears at
>> the top of the editor ?


eycu> Is the "%cursor" macro still where you want it in your template, or has it moved 
or
eycu> disappeared?

eycu> Just a thought - I don't have v3.


===End of original message text===

No, "%cursor" is where he has to be.
-- 
WilWilWil


TB 3.0
Windows XP
Service Pack 1

Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: Cursor 'jumping up' one line

[Tim Rowe]

Hi Marck,

Tuesday, September 25, 2001, 3:43:57 PM, you wrote:

> This is the result of using the auto-format.

Thanks for the prompt reply Marck :)

Best,
Tim


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d

Re[2]: Cursor under the wrong message

[Leo Zelevinsky]

Hello Thomas,

Sunday, May 06, 2001, 12:45:47 AM, you wrote:
T> I sort by received time. I open a folder with "many" new messages in
T> the main window, TB goes - splash - into a new message without
T> apparent logic. This message is now marked "read", so if I hit enter
T> to go to the Folder View (in which I view threaded by reference) and
T> work with crtl-] through the new messages, I will either have to read
T> this random message (in the middle of some thread) first or will never
T> see it.

In a situation like this, I just hit Ctrl-U (mark unread).

T> I find this annoying. Maybe I should write a bug report?

I don't see where there is a bug here.

-- 
Best regards,
 Leomailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: cursor position

[Jan Rifkinson]

Hi Allie,

On Monday, February 19, 2001 15:36:04 [ -0500 GMT], you wrote the
following in regards to 'cursor position':

Allie> TB! will always start in the To:
Allie> field when creating a new message, even though you created the message
Allie> from the address book or used the %To macro to automatically add
Allie> addresses.

  Isn't this a little like the Dept of Redundancy Dept? :-)

Jan Rifkinson
Ridgefield, CT USA
Using TB! v1.49
ICQ 41116329



-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: cursor position

[Charlie (ceejay)]

Hi Allie,
 On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, at 20:34:56 [GMT +] you wrote:

Cc>> When selecting 'create a new message' TB! places the cursor in
Cc>> 'To:' header field, even when the default template includes
Cc>> %TO="address". This is in contrast to 'reply to message' which
Cc>> places the cursor in the message body.

Cc>> Is it possible to have the TB! place the cursor in the message
Cc>> body of a new message, as per the reply default?

ACM> No, there's no way of doing this. TB! will always start in the To:
ACM> field when creating a new message, even though you created the message
ACM> from the address book or used the %To macro to automatically add
ACM> addresses.

>From a client with the configuration possibilities of the TB! that's
a little disappointing - I wont lose any sleep over it though :)

-- 
ceejay

www.turnet.co.uk Wales (UK)
TB! ver:1.49 / Platform:Windows 98 ver:4 1998 / Spec:Pll 350Mhz 128MB ram 

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Thomas

On 29 September 2000, at 08:28, you wrote

 This is not a bug. If the connection fails, TB makes anotehr attempt.

CTc>> And a very laudable action that is too, but one I would like to
CTc>> control. The addition of "If connections fails, attempt to establish a
CTc>> new connection?" would do nicely. I have my reasons for not wanting TB
CTc>> to establish the connection. But that's another (wondering off topic) story.

TF> Try setting "Maximum number of retries": 0 (zero). Default is 10
TF> (ten). You'll find it in the main menu under Options / Network &
TF> Admin, the same screen where your only Network set-up is.

But this is only available if "Use Account-specific Network settings"
is checked. Which presumably means the setting would be ignored in my
case anyway.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Thomas

On 29 September 2000, at 08:25, you wrote

CTc>> Sorry to appear contradictory, but in my case it does. TB will merrily
CTc>> go attempting to establish connections at intervals - as set in
CTc>> options, periodical checking. I have stopped this by un-checking
CTc>> periodical checking an all accounts. Which of course means I now have to
CTc>> manually ask TB to check mail.

TF> If you are sure that you have not checked "Use account specific
TF> network settings" at at least one of your accounts under Account /
TF> Properties / Network, then I am out of my wits.

Yes Thomas, I confirm that *none* of my accounts has "Use account
specific network settings" checked. I am now convinced that this is a
bug, and have sent off a bug report.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Thomas

On 28 September 2000, at 11:22, you wrote

TF> OK, what I would suggest the offline button to do: if, and only if,
TF> you are connected to the internet, and you press this button,
TF> periodical check will be suspended for all acounts.

TF> If you disconnect while you're offline, and then connect again, you
TF> are automatically online. If people object to this, I suggest a
TF> dialogue when TB starts up: "You are currently set up as offline.
TF> Would go switch to online operation Y/N?"

Bang on the money there Thomas. Exactly right.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Tobias

On 28 September 2000, at 14:28, you wrote

>> This is not a bug. If the connection fails, TB makes anotehr attempt.

And a very laudable action that is too, but one I would like to
control. The addition of "If connections fails, attempt to establish a
new connection?" would do nicely. I have my reasons for not wanting TB
to establish the connection. But that's another (wondering off topic) story.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Thomas

On 28 September 2000, at 03:01, you wrote

TF> If you press the cancel button, *this* attempt will be cancelled, and
TF> another attempt will be made later. However, since a few versions ago,
TF> we also have an *Abort* button, and when you press that one, TB will
TF> not make another attempt. I think you didn't know this! :-)

Sorry to appear contradictory, but in my case it does. TB will merrily
go attempting to establish connections at intervals - as set in
options, periodical checking. I have stopped this by un-checking
periodical checking an all accounts. Which of course means I now have to
manually ask TB to check mail.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Thomas

On 28 September 2000, at 03:02, you wrote

ACM>>> Actually, you *can* prevent it from checking while you're offline.

ACM>>> Do the following:
TF> [...]
CTc>> I've tried that, and I assure you that TB *still* insists on trying to
CTc>> establish a dial-up connection when offline.

TF> See my tow earlier postings in this thread. Curtis' instruction is not
TF> complete.

Seen... thanks.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Thomas

On 27 September 2000, at 13:01, you wrote

TF>>> You have to set up your dialling instructions *inly* under Options /
TF>>> Network & Admin. 
TF>   = "only"

Yep, done that.

CTc>> I only had my main account properties Networking checked to use
CTc>> Account Specific Network settings... which could of course be part of
CTc>> the problem.

TF> Deejay, "only one" is more than zero. You should have "Use
TF> specific network" is zero accounts. ;-)

I now have NO (zero) accounts checked to use account specific network
settings.

CTc>> I've un-checked this option, lets see what happens.

TF> I expect it works as you hoped for. At least, that's what I confirm
TF> for my home installation of TB.

Sadly no. I can confirm that TB *still* insists on trying to establish
a dial-up connection. I am as certain as I can be that I've tried just
about every permutation of settings in Network properties.

I am as certain as I can be that is a bug and will report it. It is
worth mentioning, that this bug won't show up for everyone. I believe
this may only happen when the connection is dropped remotely. My
dial-up provider operates a two hour cut off, plus due to over
subscription of this particular service line dropping is a pretty
regular occurrence too. I know what you're going to say change your
provider. Sadly for a number of reasons it's not that simple.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello A

On 27 September 2000, at 20:26, you wrote

CTc>> I've a feeling I may be doing something wrong here, so please bear
CTc>> with me on this one. What happens to you (and other TB users) when
CTc>> you run TB while off-line? For me TB will repeatedly attempt to
CTc>> establish a dial-up connection. This happens no matter how I set up
CTc>> properties for any my accounts. I have heard that this may be a
CTc>> bug!?

ACM> Actually, you *can* prevent it from checking while you're offline.

ACM> Do the following:

i) Go to Options ->> Network Administration
ACM> ii) Enable 'dial-up network connection'.
ACM> iii) Enable 'no automatic dial for periodic checking'.
ACM> iv) Enable 'Use existing Dial-up connection (if any)'.

I've tried that, and I assure you that TB *still* insists on trying to
establish a dial-up connection when offline.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello A

On 27 September 2000, at 18:31, you wrote

TF>> Since you trash them after reading them, I think this would make
TF>> sense for you too. Would it?

ACM> He threads his messages. I understand what he's saying.

ACM> Take Gravity for instance, you can have it check the newservers at
ACM> user-defined periodic intervals, *but*, it also has an online/offline
ACM> button right there on the toolbar. Toggle it off, and it will stop doing
ACM> the periodic checks, even though you're still connected to the internet.

ACM> I agree that this would be a useful feature. There are times when I'm
ACM> downloading a file and TB! attempts to access the mail server. It has
ACM> the dickens of a time trying to connect and also slows down my download
ACM> speed. When I used to use X-Ray, these attempts would at times end with
ACM> X-Ray crashing. I have to prevent periodic checking to prevent this. I'd
ACM> prefer to just be able to hit an easily accessible switch. Right now,
ACM> what I do is to disable the periodic checking option in the account
ACM> options when I wish to. This method would of course annoy those that
ACM> need to do this 10 times per day. :-)

Very succinct, I would guess there may be a number of users that would
find an online/offilne button useful.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Tobias

On 27 September 2000, at 15:32, you wrote

TF>>> What should this do exactly?

>> Reading or writing e-mail off-line... hitting an off-line button would
>> prevent auto-checking of mailboxes. Those with permanent connections
>> connection (unmetered Telco charges) wouldn't of course worry about
>> this. Only those who establish intermittent connections would have a
>> need fro this.

TW> Well I would appreciate an online/offline button as well (although I
TW> have a permanent connection). I have TB! check my mailinglists every
TW> 15 minutes. But obviously I cannot always read the mails every 15
TW> minutes. So it is not unusual that there pile up 100+ mails from a
TW> list, that I have to go through. During this time I would rather
TW> prefer, that TB! does not get the new mails, since it would sort some of
TW> them into threads I have already read a moment ago. I would then
TW> risk deleting the unread mail with the mail I went through.

Makes sense to me Tobias. I wouldn't place an online/offline button in
the "must have, can't live without" category but I would find it a
useful feature.


-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Thomas

On 26 September 2000, at 14:28, you wrote

TF> Hallo Charlie,

TF> On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:53:39 +0100 GMT (26/09/2000, 04:53 +0800 GMT),
TF> Charlie Turner (ceejay) wrote:

CTc>>   Does  anyone else think an on-line/off-line button for the main tool
CTc>>   bar  a useful idea.

TF> What should this do exactly?

Reading or writing e-mail off-line... hitting an off-line button would
prevent auto-checking of mailboxes. Those with permanent connections
connection (unmetered Telco charges) wouldn't of course worry about
this. Only those who establish intermittent connections would have a
need fro this.

CTc>>  The main reason I ask is I have TB set up to use
CTc>>   Dial-up  networking | Use an existing connection when available | No
CTc>>   automatic dial for periodical checking. Trouble is the ISP I use for
CTc>>   dial-up  has  a  two  hour  cut off, and it can - at busy times - be
CTc>>   difficult  re-establishing a connection. I have a couple of accounts
CTc>>   set  to  check  mail boxes every 5 minutes by default, as a result I
CTc>>   have  TB  trying  to  establish  a connection

TF> Why would TB try to establish a connection if you have "no automatic
TF> redial" checked?

Precisely my point Thomas, I wouldn't have expected it to - but in my
case it does!

TF> The reason will be that at least one of the accounts has "Use specific
TF> Network..." checked with dial-up information under Account /
TF> Properties / Network. Any spefici netowrk setting will ignore the "no
TF> automatic" instruction.

TF> You have to set up your dialling instructions *inly* under Options /
TF> Network & Admin.

I only had my main account properties Networking checked to use
Account Specific Network settings... which could of course be part of
the problem. I've un-checked this option, lets see what happens.

-- 
have a good day
   Charlie (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Tony

On 25 September 2000, at 22:43, Tony wrote

TB> This message: 25/09/2000 22:36 GMT.

TB> Hello Charlie,


TB>   A reminder of what Charlie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) typed on:
TB>   25 September 2000 at 21:53:39 GMT +0100

CTc>> For example, if I go to my address book and select an entry; right
CTc>> click> new> message - the editor window opens with the cursor in the
CTc>> To: header field, why? I've already selected the addressee from the
CTc>> address book. To be picky I'd like the cursor precisely where I
CTc>> specify it in the respective template

TB> If you click anywhere in the main window your cursor will appear not
TB> where you click but where you specified in the template.

TB> Even if it did start it's life at the cursor position specified in the
TB> template, you would still need to enter a Subject. So I think a better
TB> solution would be for the cursor to be positioned initially in the
TB> subject field rather than the start of the address field.
  
Good point Tony, I really was being picky. I was interrupted part way
through that original message and left out the main reason for sending
it. This point was intended as a prelude to asking how I position the
cursor within quoted text in a reply - now asked in a separate
message.

have a good day
   Charlie Turner (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Cursor postion (&) Netorking settings

[Charlie Turner (ceejay)]

Hello Tobias

On 25 September 2000, at 22:18, Tobias wrote

TW> Hello Charlie,

TW> On Montag, 25. September 2000 at 22:53:39 you wrote:

>> I have a couple of accounts set to check mail boxes every 5 minutes
>> by default, as a result I have TB trying to establish a connection
>> at the same time as my auto-dialer. This is despite my default
>> instructions in TB for no automatic dialing(?) Perhaps I'm
>> misunderstanding this part of TB and should be using; Local Area
>> Network or manual connection in Network properties?

TW> That is a bug in TB! I used to experiance, too (now I am connected via
TW> LAN), and that cost me quite a lot of onlinecharges when TB! dialed in
TW> while I was away. TB! autodials, despite the different setting, when
TW> something abnormal happenens during mailchecking or mailsending. I.e.
TW> if you cancel the procedures or if the internetconnection breaks down.

   Thanks  Tobias, it looks as though I'm going to have to keep an
   eye on things eh. Luckily on-line charges are not going to be a
   problem  as  I  pay  a  flat  rate  monthly  fee.  Its more the
   inconvenience  of  having  the  TB attempting to dial out which
   freaks out my auto-dialler when it can't pick up a dial tone.

Charlie Turner (ceejay)

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: %Cursor query

[Oleg Zalyalov]

Hello, the Bat! list recipients,

Thursday, March 02, 2000, Paula Ford wrote to Allie Martin about
%Cursor  query:

PF> The conclusion of the thread was a suggestion to add a macro that would
PF> put the focus in the message composition. Perhaps it's on RIT's to-do
PF> list.

And  I  would  like  to be able to put cursor to Subject field -- that
could prevent from forgetting to enter subject in some cases.

-- 
Best regards,
Oleg Zalyalov. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

  Using The Bat! version 1.39
  under Windows NT 4.0 Build 1381 Service Pack 6

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: %cursor was: Re[2]: (No Subject)

[Jast]

Morning Steve Lamb,

 My reply to this is a little belated, I guess. I just remembered what
 I wanted to write ;-)

> Toggle macros are just like checkboxes. On, off. OTOH, they do take
> up space[*] unless you tack them onto the end of a line somewhere
> and then you can't see them.

 That's just what I do and I have no problem with it :-)

 But the real issue is also consitency. Actually, a macro in Bat! only
 makes sense when a certain element has to be placed in a certain
 position within the message. This is the case with %cursor,
 %ofromname, %windowsversion etc. but not with information belonging
 in the To field or subject.

 So to stay consistent, the following options would be logical from my
 current POV:

 - set all information regarding the message in the macro field - the
   way it is
 - add additional macro fields for From, To, CC, BCC, Subject.
 - set all information that does not have to be positioned within the
   message in seperate entry fields


-- 
+--Jast
|on Windows 98 4.10 Build   A 
:with The Bat! 1.36



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

Re[2]: %cursor was: Re[2]: (No Subject)

[Jast]

Morning Steve Lamb,

> That it would. I like the idea of a template definition, just not
> sure if I want to fully endorse another template macro which is
> nothing more than a toggle that is better served, IMHO, by
> checkboxes on the templates.

 I prefer template macros. They are more versatile (in regard to
 usability - you never know what functionality you could add to a
 macro) and don't take up window space if you don't use it. Really, I
 don't like long option lists. Of course, macros should be well
 documented...


-- 
+--Jast
|on Windows 98 4.10 Build   A 
:with The Bat! 1.36



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

Re[2]: %cursor was: Re[2]: (No Subject)

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hi Steve,

on Tuesday, November 23, 1999, 2:33:19 AM GMT+0800, Steve Lamb wrote:



SL> Monday, November 22, 1999, 6:15:22 AM, Thomas wrote:
>> You mean a switch like a %SkipHeader macro?

SL> That would work.  I'd actually like to see the current behavior of the
SL> reply template changed so that it, too, does not skip the header input but
SL> allow something like this to let the user decide.

OK, so by default the cursor should always go into the header, even if
there is data (TO/Subject/...) already. Unless there is a %SkipHeader
macro. This defines the default as opposite to what I was thinking of,
but I get your point.

However, what if there is no To recipient but a %SkipHeader macro, should the 
%SkipHeader
macro be ignored? Or how to you suggest to deal with that situation?

-- 

Thanks for expl,
Thomas.  

Message reply created with The Bat! 1.38 Beta/3
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998  
on a Pentium II/350 MHz.



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

Re[2]: %Cursor

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hallo Christopher,

On Saturday, November 20, 1999, 7:38:16 PM (GMT+0800), Christopher J. Trybowski wrote:

CJT> On Thursday, November 18, 1999 Thomas Fernandez wrote:

>> I motion to change that. I don't need a cursor command if I have to
>> hit TAB three or four times, or use the mouse anyway. The cursor
>> should go were the %Cursor command says it should start.

>> Does anybody second the motion, so we can put it on the (mysterious, as
>> never seen or published) wish-list?

CJT> I  agree,  especially that in new 1.38 beta/1 macros are claimed to be
CJT> "fully-recursive".  In  this  case  I  think  that  constructions like
CJT> "%TO="%OFromName  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>%Cursor" should be allowed. In this

[...]

CJT> Why  do  I propose this? Well, I think that with this both sides, both
CJT> Steve  and  Thomas would get what they wanted.

>From my POV, you are right. :-)

CJT> The only weak point is, that I'm not sure how much extra
CJT> programming and extra code would it take (I guess not too much,
CJT> for we already have recursive macros in 1.38 beta/1).

How about this:

If there is a %TO= macro then
   if it contains %Cursor then
  place cursor there
  {continue by doing whatever is now being done in the header, and
  once the body has been reached:}
  if there is a free-standing %Cursor macro in the template
 place the cursor at that position in the body
  else
 place the cursor at the beginning of the body
  endif
   else {this means we have a %TO macro that does not contain %Cursor}
  if there is a %Cursor macro in the template then
 place cursor at that position in the body {skip the header}
  else
 place cursor at the beginning of the body {skip the header}
  endif
   endif
else {this means there is no %TO macro and the TO field is still empty}
   place the cursor in the TO field
endif

The cursor would end up in the header in two cases:
1.) It is instructed to do so by %Cursor command within the %TO macro.
2.) If there is no %TO macro. Regardless of whether there is a %CC=
macro, as the TO field has to be filled in, no way around that. This
should satisfy Steve.

If, OTOH, the TO field has already been filled in, the cursor would be
placed at where the %Cursor macro says. This is what I suggested.

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Message reply created with The Bat! 1.38 Beta/2
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998  
using an Intel Celeron 366 Mhz, 128MB RAM



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

Re[2]: %Cursor

[Watcher]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

  Well, after reading the almost 40 messages generated to reply to my
question I have gotten answers to most of my questions and have
realized that this thread begs me to learn how to setup a kill file.
Steve may be very knowledgeable but he is counter productive to this
list as far as I can tell.
  I'd like to note that almost 25% of the emails that followed the
thread I started with no subject, were from Steve and the amazing
part
is he not only did NOT help me resolve any of my problems but he also
managed to alienate a fairly large group of people including any
newbie that might be watching.
  I'm an old timer too and there is always a Steve around to bugger
things up, it appears to be their joy in life.  My solution?  By the
time he can reply to this all his messages to me will be heading
straight to the bitbucket without review.
  After having read the thread, I still think it makes sense that if
I
fill in the To: field via address book or via %TO macro the cursor
should be at the next blank field or the Subject field.  I rarely use
the CC or BCC field but I may be unusual in this.  *shrug*
  Thank you for suggesting the %cookie="path/to/file", that is the
solution I was hoping to find, it's a shame I was unable to find that
in the documentation or even in the list of macros that are presented
via the right click.
  I would still like to find a keystroke that is convenient
(Ctrl-anything is less than convenient) to simply walk through all of
my messages letting my emailer find the next message even changing
folders if all messages in the current folder are read.  This is a
functionality that I have assumed to be in all mail programs that are
also being used for news or list reading, in pine for example it is
space, in elm it's space, in Becky it is space, in tin it is space,
in
Netscape it is space... I'm beginning to think that space would be a
good key to assign to this task.  Of course it should be a
configurable option for those of you that prefer not to have this
feature.  If you really want to have a well loved program make all
the
keys configurable, everyone is different so you will NEVER find "the
right" key assignments without permitting the user to choose on a
case
by case basis.  I'm more interested in the additional functionality
than what key is used.
  Ooops, am I allowed to make suggestions?  Steve?
  I appreciate those who attempted to defend my right to ask a
question or even *gasp* make a suggestion despite Steve's
protestations but in the future you can just ignore his replies to
me,
I know I will.  8^)
  Thanks again to all who attempted to help.

Thursday, November 18, 1999, 10:11:47 AM, Steve wrote:
> Wednesday, November 17, 1999, 10:11:31 PM, Thomas wrote:
>> Does anybody second the motion, so we can put it on the
>> (mysterious, as never seen or published) wish-list?  

> No.  Because it works as expected.  Quite frankly, I just shook
> my head and sighed when I saw your initial message because, well,
> it was idiotic.  Of course a new message is going to have you enter
> the header information first. MUAs have been doing this since there
> *have* been MUAs.  To change that behavior for your personal whims
> would be to break expected behavior for the benefit minuscule
> minority of one...  you.  


- - -- 
Watcher aka Bill DeVos |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.aack.net/  | http://www.aack.net/watcher
- -
- -
Put knot yore trust inn spel chequers
- -
- -

- -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5i

iQA/AwUBODTyZW14vvNVqX4UEQIfUQCeOtC3Bn0G7gEHBM4ONGUWkqqt3+sAoNLP
4AEyMRSADSAVFmURsH0oudHH
=FJ5W
- -END PGP SIGNATURE-

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5i

iQA/AwUBODWXQW14vvNVqX4UEQJ1agCg5Qjl904aJeSMB6d3xt++E6xRhdUAn0me
mduoLewr7F4yllYK9VI1E1p5
=rFqX
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

Re[2]: %Cursor

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hi Syafril,

on Friday, November 19, 1999, 6:38:36 PM GMT+0800, Syafril Hermansyah wrote:

SH> You're  right,  MUA  =  Mail  User  Agent.  It is standard name in RFC
SH> related  to  E-mail;  and  SMTP  Mail  Server mostly said as MTA (Mail
SH> Transfer Agent).

I stand corrected.

-- 

Best regards,
Thomas.  

Message reply created with The Bat! 1.38 Beta/1
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998  
on a Pentium II/350 MHz.



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

Re[2]: %Cursor

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hi Paula,

on Friday, November 19, 1999, 6:24:10 PM GMT+0800, Paula Ford wrote:

>> I don't even know what an MUA is.

PF> Me neither and it's not listed in the Webopaedia. Internet search turned
PF> up:

[lovable a well-researched list skipped]

PF> So, I'm guessing it's (E-)Mail User Agent and not Rotuma chiefs that
PF> have been "doing this since there have been MUAs".

ROTFL :-D

Let's fill in the blanks:

SL Of course a new message is going to have you enter the header
SL information first. Mail User Agents have been doing this since
SL there *have* been Mail User Agents.
[legal remark: this is a forged quotation. Steve never wrote this.]

I am not sure whether this makes sense to me. I have called my email
programme Mail Client, Mail Prog, and other things that are not fit
for a user list targeting families, but never a Mail User Agent. OTOH,
I only entered Cyberspace four years ago (when the first ISP opened in
Thailand), so what do *I* know. :-)

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.  

Message reply created with The Bat! 1.38 Beta/1
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998  
on a Pentium II/350 MHz.



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--

Re[2]: %Cursor

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hi Steve,

on Thursday, November 18, 1999, 11:11:47 PM GMT+0800, Steve Lamb wrote:

>> Does anybody second the motion, so we can put it on the (mysterious, as
>> never seen or published) wish-list?

SL> No.  Because it works as expected.

Not as expected by me.

SL> Quite frankly, I just shook my head and sighed when I saw your
SL> initial message because, well, it was idiotic.

I always love your down-to-earth factual replies. ;-)

SL> Of course a new message is going to have you enter the header
SL> information first. MUAs have been doing this since there *have*
SL> been MUAs.

I don't even know what an MUA is. But I don't understand why the
cursor has to be in the header if the information is already complete.
This is the gist of my posting.

SL> To change that behavior for your personal whims would be to break
SL> expected behavior for the benefit minuscule minority of one...
SL> you.

The purpose of my posting this msg on the list was to determine
whether it is true that I am this "miniscule minority". And, once
again, I have to admire your empirical database. How do you know that
I am? Maybe any rules ("MUA's"?) that were made about a century ago
are not appreciated by today's crowd? Are we not open to discuss
ideas?

Looking forward to your factual reply. :-)

-- 

Ciao,
Thomas.  

Message reply created with The Bat! 1.37 Beta/3
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998  
on a Pentium II/350 MHz.



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   
--