Re: GMT Time Stamp

John [J], On 28-06-2002 09:00, you wrote in : >> John, I know how to change the "local" time (%otimelong) to display no >> seconds, but how do I do that with the RegExp time? J> Just change the appropriate macro in the expression. Is this waht you mean? I know. I wasn't

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Chris, On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 08:23:05 +0100 GMT (28/06/02, 14:23 +0700 GMT), Chris Weaven wrote: CW> 1. "20:58 GMT -0700 (Friday, June 28, 2002 at 04:58" doesn't add up. CW> It appears to be missing the summer daylight saver bit, the adding CW> and removing of an hour during the different ti

Re[2]: GMT Time Stamp

Hi Januk, Now I know who to come to with template help :-) I made a couple of minor changes to your template below; JA> You wrote on %QINLUDE="Date", at %QINCLUDE="Time" (%ODATE=", %- JA> d, ""at"" h:nn am/pm" where I live): and got; %OFROMFNAME %OFROMLNAME wrote on %QINCLUDE="D

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Salutation Marck On 27 June 2002 at 22:36:01 +0100 (which was 22:36 where I live) Marck D Pearlstone graced us with these comments I would have answered this myself earlier but I do have to speak to my family sometime. :) DE>>> personally I don't t

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hi David, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 21:18:11 +0100, you wrote: > I have to deal with the IT infrastructure of the banks so i know how bad > they are. Lucky you ;) > ps do you know that your mail is going through a server (66.137.233.209)that > is on a black list at http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/ Erm..

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Jonathan On 27 June 2002 at 15:00:35 -0500 (which was 21:00 where I live) Jonathan Angliss wrote >> personally I don't think that they would have noticed, banks being that >> inefficient. > Depends on the duration of the outage... I normally

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Marck, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 22:36:01 +0100 GMT (28/06/02, 04:36 +0700 GMT), Marck D Pearlstone wrote: MDP> Erm ... no, David was talking of a PSP (Payment Service Provider) EFT MDP> conduit to the bank - the "other side" of the fence. I have no idea what this is, and had better shut up the

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Chris, On Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 21:57 GMT +0100, an infinite number of monkeys posting as Chris Weaven [CW] typed: CW> 1. How do I call this from the quick templates rather than pasting it CW> directly into the reply/forward template? To start, I apologize to the moderators if this i

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Jonathan, @27 June 2002, 14:56:14 -0500 (20:56 UK time) Jonathan Angliss in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck D Pearlstone: > How so? I mean how is IE more advanced technically? Internally - the DOM implementation is the be

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Thomas, @27 June 2002, 03:08:42 +0700 (21:08 UK time) Thomas F in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to David Elliott on TBUDL: DE>> personally I don't think that they would have noticed, banks DE>> being that inefficient. > Bruhaha!

Re[2]: GMT Time Stamp

Original message received from Januk Aggarwal on 27/06/02 Hi, JA> You wrote %- JA> %SETPATTREGEXP="(?m-s)Date\:\s*((.*?[\d]{4})\s*?([\d]{0,2}\:[\d]{0,2})\:[\d]{0,2}\s*?(.*))"%- JA> %REGEXPBLINDMATCH="%HEADERS"%- JA> on %SUBPATT="2", at %SUBPATT="3" [GMT%SUBPATT="4"] (%OTIMELONG %ODATE %- JA> wh

Re: GMT Time Stamp

On Thursday, June 27, 2002, Joseph N. wrote... JA>> Version 7 is in pre-release state at the moment, but I've not had JA>> a single issue with it, and apart from it taking about 3 seconds JA>> longer to load than IE, it's a lot smoother, and I've not seen JA>> any issues. > Unless one needs the

Re[2]: GMT Time Stamp

JA> Version 7 is in pre-release state at the moment, but I've not had a JA> single issue with it, and apart from it taking about 3 seconds longer JA> to load than IE, it's a lot smoother, and I've not seen any issues. Unless one needs the features that Netscape adds to the Mozilla suite, e.g., Ne

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jonathan Angliss [JA] wrote: JA> How so? I mean how is IE more advanced technically? I've recently JA> switched to Netscape (which is just Mozilla in disguise) because JA> there are a whole load

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello David, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:53:08 +0100 GMT (28/06/02, 02:53 +0700 GMT), David Elliott wrote: >> lol... why am I not surprised? Bet Bank of Ireland were a little upset >> about that one. DE> personally I don't think that they would have noticed, banks being that DE> inefficient. Bruhah

Re: GMT Time Stamp

On Thursday, June 27, 2002, Thomas F wrote... > I switched from Metscape to IE when IE5 and NS6 came out. IE5 was > superior, but NS6 was a huge memory hug. Has the memory thingy > improved with version 7? Version 7 is in pre-release state at the moment, but I've not had a single issue with it,

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello David, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:42:13 +0100 GMT (28/06/02, 02:42 +0700 GMT), David Elliott wrote: DE> Humm, What is the URL ? The same as you menton below. DE> If it is http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBFAQ.html then I can get it DE> fine. I have also checked the page on the server and

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Jonathan, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:56:14 -0500 GMT (28/06/02, 02:56 +0700 GMT), Jonathan Angliss wrote: JA> How so? I mean how is IE more advanced technically? I've recently JA> switched to Netscape (which is just Mozilla in disguise) because there JA> are a whole load of features that IE

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Julian, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:39:36 +0100 GMT (28/06/02, 02:39 +0700 GMT), Julian Beach (Lists) wrote: JBL> I don't know if this is connected, but there are reports about a BT JBL> HTTP server problem causing difficulties for DSL users trying to JBL> access websites and send email in some

Re: GMT Time Stamp

On Thursday, June 27, 2002, David Elliott wrote... > personally I don't think that they would have noticed, banks being that > inefficient. Depends on the duration of the outage... I normally spot an outage of about 30 seconds or more where I work... and if I'm not at home, a small program notif

Re: GMT Time Stamp

On Thursday, June 27, 2002, Marck D Pearlstone wrote... > Mozilla looks like a much better choice, although IE is still a long > way ahead of the bunch technically. It's just a shame there are so > many security holes in it. How so? I mean how is IE more advanced technically? I've recently swi

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Jonathan On 27 June 2002 at 14:29:37 -0500 (which was 20:29 where I live) Jonathan Angliss thoughtfully wrote the following > lol... why am I not surprised? Bet Bank of Ireland were a little upset > about that one. personally I don't think that

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Sudip, @27 June 2002, 21:24:36 +0545 (16:39 UK time) Sudip Pokhrel in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck D Pearlstone: MDP>> The FAQ works fine for me on Opera 6.02 as long as it identifies MDP>> itself as Opera. If you have i

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Thomas On 27 June 2002 at 01:37:28 +0700 (which was 19:37 where I live) Thomas F emanated these words of wisdom > Thanks. I can connect now and get the familiar blank page when IE says > "done". This time, the last lines were: >   > You see,

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello David On 27 June 2002 at 20:23:51 +0100 (which was 20:23 where I live) David Elliott might have written whoops should have been off list. - -- BFN, ___ David

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello David, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:23:51 +0100 GMT (28/06/02, 02:23 +0700 GMT), David Elliott wrote: DE> Just checked out Priam. It has been up and running all the time so it does DE> look like a connection problem between BT and Scotland. DE> Almost as good as last week with BT cutting the po

Re: GMT Time Stamp

On Thursday, June 27, 2002, 7:37:28 PM, Thomas F wrote: > Thanks. I can connect now and get the familiar blank page when IE says > "done". This time, the last lines were: >   > You see, it breaks up in the middle of the line. I don't know if this is connected, but there are reports about a BT

Re: GMT Time Stamp

On Thursday, June 27, 2002, David Elliott wrote... > Just checked out Priam. It has been up and running all the time so > it does look like a connection problem between BT and Scotland. > Almost as good as last week with BT cutting the power at Stanstead > Abbots in Hertfordshire and cutting of

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello David, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 19:23:55 +0100 GMT (28/06/02, 01:23 +0700 GMT), David Elliott wrote: DE> It is OK now. There was a connection down between BT and the ISP. Thanks. I can connect now and get the familiar blank page when IE says "done". This time, the last lines were:   http://fa

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Greetings David On 27 June 2002 at 19:23:55 +0100 (which was 19:23 where I live) David Elliott wrote > On 27 June 2002 at 00:24:19 +0700 (which was 18:24 where I live) Thomas F > might have written >> I cannot connect to the FAQ at all (Cannot find

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Thomas On 27 June 2002 at 00:24:19 +0700 (which was 18:24 where I live) Thomas F might have written > I cannot connect to the FAQ at all (Cannot find server - DNS error) It is OK now. There was a connection down between BT and the ISP. - --

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Sudip, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 21:24:36 +0545 GMT (27/06/02, 22:39 +0700 GMT), Sudip Pokhrel wrote: SP> Yeah I had the Browser Identification set as IE, I changed it to SP> Opera, nevertheless it's still not working (sigh) It may have to do with your connection. Right now, I cannot connect to

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Januk [J], On 27-06-2002 19:05, you wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: J> A small change to the version Jon posted will do the trick: Thanks. -- Best regards Peter Fjelsten 1.60q Windows XP 5.1.2600 Current V

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello John, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 21:08:39 +1000 GMT (27/06/02, 18:08 +0700 GMT), John Phillips wrote: JP> You wrote On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, at 17:29:39 [GMT +0700] (20:29:39 Thursday, 27 June 2002 where I live):-

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Peter, Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 14:29 GMT +0200, was when inspiration required Peter Fjelsten [PF] to write: PF> John, I know how to change the "local" time (%otimelong) to display no PF> seconds, but how do I do that with the RegExp time? A small change to the version Jon posted will d

Re[2]: GMT Time Stamp

Hi Marck, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:51:47 +0100 GMT (6/27/02, 20:36 NST), you [MDP] wrote: MDP> The FAQ works fine for me on Opera 6.02 as long as it identifies MDP> itself as Opera. If you have it set to identify as IE then you'll see MDP> nothing because it isn't IE. Yeah I had the Browser Iden

Re[2]: GMT Time Stamp

Hi Tim, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 09:59:20 -0400 GMT (6/27/02, 19:44 NST), you [TM] wrote: TM> I would hazard a guess it is the FAQ link at the bottom of each msg TM> from this list... Already tried that Tim.. it simply redirects me to the Silverstones FAQ page-the one that is not working (for me)

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Sudip, @27 June 2002, 19:31:03 +0545 (14:46 UK time) Sudip Pokhrel in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck D Pearlstone: MDP>> There's your problem. Follow the "Flat" version links on the MDP>> first page, which you will be able

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hey Sudip, My MUA believes you used The Bat! (v1.60q) Personal to write [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 9:46:03 AM. MDP>> There's your problem. Follow the "Flat" version links on the MDP>> first page, which you will be able to read. SP> What first page are

Re[2]: GMT Time Stamp

Hi Marck, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 11:11:34 +0100 GMT (6/27/02, 15:56 NST), you [MDP] wrote: MDP> There's your problem. Follow the "Flat" version links on the MDP> first page, which you will be able to read. What first page are you referring to? I went to your home page and the link there doesn't wo

Re: GMT Time Stamp

John [J], On 27-06-2002 13:08, you wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: J> This one may be better, no hard coding:- J> You wrote J> %SETPATTREGEXP="(?m-s)Date\:\s*?((.*?[\d]{4})\s*?([\d]{0,2}\:[\d]{0,2}\:[\d]{0,2})\s*?(.*))"%REGEXPBLINDMATCH="%HEADERS" J> On%SUBPATT="2", at %SU

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Thomas You wrote On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, at 17:29:39 [GMT +0700] (20:29:39 Thursday, 27 June 2002 where I live):- > At the end of the second line, you see "+0700 GMT" hardcoded. Replace > that with you own time zone (+0545 GMT). This regular expression, by > the way, was created a few yea

Re: GMT Time Stamp

Hello Sudip, On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:00:31 +0545 GMT (27/06/02, 16:15 +0700 GMT), Sudip Pokhrel wrote: SP>This is my first post. Just migrated to The Bat! from Pocomail. Welcome to the list. :-) SP>How do I create a GMT time stamp in the Reply prefix that I see SP>people

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sudip, Thursday, June 27, 2002, 5:15:31 AM, you wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: SP> While I'm at it, can anyone reccommend a good HTML editor (with as SP> smaller a foorprint as possible) that I can use to create an SP> occassional HTML messages. Tw

Re: GMT Time Stamp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Sudip, @27 June 2002, 15:00:31 +0545 (10:15 UK time) Sudip Pokhrel in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Also, I can't load the FAQ pages at Silverstone. > [IE 5.0, Opera 6.03 (default)] ^ There's your

GMT Time Stamp

Hi, This is my first post. Just migrated to The Bat! from Pocomail. How do I create a GMT time stamp in the Reply prefix that I see people using in this list. Preferably, where can I cut & paste the macro from :) While I'm at it, can anyone reccommend a good HTML edi