Steve wrote...
SL On Fri, Jan 28, 2000 at 03:30:25PM +0900, John De Hoog wrote:
I tend to prefer the former approach, which is easy and more widely
used.
SL The problem is that it makes the assumption that if text is marked then
SL you want to use it for a reply. That is not the only reason to mark text. A
SL lot of email that some people get have data in the email they use in other
SL windows and CP to those windows. Automatic quoting of marked material is a
SL pain. Furthermore, aside from simple replies like this one, it is not good to
SL use since if quoting properly the individual should be quoting a little,
SL replying a little, quoting a little more and so on. IE, it isn't a single
SL block of text he is quoting.
So why couldn't it be offered as an option? Whether it's a pain or a
convenience depends on the type of mail you get. For most of mine, I
quote only a selected part, not the whole message. So it's a function
I use all the time when it's available.
I don't really know what you mean by "marking" text for other
reasons, BTW.
The Datula approach, though, has the advantage of letting you select
text, open the context menu on it and decide what to do, with one
option being to reply to that portion alone.
--
Yours,
John De Hoog, Tokyo
http://wonmug.com
--
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
