Hello MFPA,
On Tuesday, June 03, 2014 you wrote:
>> Interestingly, when the body of the message
>> is in the *viewer* window after selecting it from the
>> list, there are two tabs at the lower left; HTML and
>> TEXT. Clicking the TEXT tab instantly reformats the
>> body into 70 character lines.
Hi
On Monday 2 June 2014 at 2:25:22 PM, in
, Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
> Actually what happens is I can get a couple (or more,
> depending on the length of the line) of spaces tacked
> onto the end of the line before the spaces start
> printing on the next line. The line I started typing
> the spa
Hello MFPA,
On Monday, June 02, 2014 you wrote:
M> Hi
M> On Sunday 1 June 2014 at 1:34:48 PM, in
M> , Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
>> Alas, in HTML ALT+L does nothing. No effect
>> whatsoever.
M> What happens in the HTML editor if you go to the end of the long line
M> and start typing spaces? For e
Hi
On Sunday 1 June 2014 at 1:34:48 PM, in
, Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
> Alas, in HTML ALT+L does nothing. No effect
> whatsoever.
What happens in the HTML editor if you go to the end of the long line
and start typing spaces? For each space added in the plaintext editor,
the line wraps 70-chara
>Egads M, the link doesn't work, or at least presents me with something I don't
>understand (more likely).
The PHP need tweaking
--
Rick
"People are made to be loved and things are made to be used... The confusion in
this world is that people are being used and things are being loved..."
v6.4
Hello MFPA,
On Sunday, June 01, 2014 you wrote:
M> Hi
M> On Sunday 1 June 2014 at 4:28:07 AM, in
M> , Leonard S. Berkowitz wrote:
>> Even though I have my line length set to 70 character,
>> sometimes, mainly when pasting. I see such long lines.
>> I do not bother with the slider, just +l wraps
On Sunday, June 1, 2014, 8:34:48 AM, Jack S. LaRosa (tbudl@thebat.dutaint.com)
wrote:
> Alas, in HTML ALT+L does nothing. No effect whatsoever. Is it
> possible you're referring to the ALT+L command for when you're using
> PLAIN TEXT (MicroEd)? There, ALT+L will reformat a paragraph to the
> l
Hi
On Sunday 1 June 2014 at 4:28:07 AM, in
, Leonard S. Berkowitz wrote:
> Even though I have my line length set to 70 character,
> sometimes, mainly when pasting. I see such long lines.
> I do not bother with the slider, just +l wraps the
> line just the way I like it. I think the "l" means
>
Hello Leonard,
On Sunday, June 01, 2014 you wrote:
LSB> On Saturday, May 31, 2014, 5:55:53 PM,Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
>> I've just noticed that when I click the reply icon and the reply
>> window opens up, the quoted text runs beyond the border of the window.
>> A slider bar appears at the bottom
On Saturday, May 31, 2014, 5:55:53 PM,Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
> I've just noticed that when I click the reply icon and the reply
> window opens up, the quoted text runs beyond the border of the window.
> A slider bar appears at the bottom which will allow me to view the
> right-side text but even if
It is usually in HTML emails when the quoted text is wide. You can keep typing
and it will not wrap until you reach that width
--
Rick
Yoga is the settling of the mind into silence. When the mind has settled, we
are established in our essential nature, which is unbounded Consciousness. Our
es
Hello TBUDLs,
I've just noticed that when I click the reply icon and the reply
window opens up, the quoted text runs beyond the border of the window.
A slider bar appears at the bottom which will allow me to view the
right-side text but even if I expand the window to full screen, there
is some tex
Hello ...in addition to my previous message...
on 20-Apr-2006 at 20:09 you (Alexander S. Kunz) wrote:
> If you don't mind the privacy issue, would you send me such a message
> in a PM for testing? You can use the "alternative forward"
> (Shift+ALT+F5) for that - it will include the original messa
Howdy Tim,
Thursday, April 20, 2006, 6:31:37 PM, Tim wrotened:
>> Are \Utilities\AutoWrap and \Utilities\AutoFormat enabled or disabled,
Tim> AutoWrap enabled, AutoFormat disabled during my origianl test.
Tim> Although, I recreated the test using one of the same emails that
Tim> I replied to in
Hello Tim Hamm & everyone else,
on 20-Apr-2006 at 19:56 you (Tim Hamm) wrote:
> What I'm referring to is when I am typing in my reply to quoted text
> that TB does not autowrap my "reply" at the default settings... my
> reply is running all the way to the right margin but only on certain
> types
Hello Alexander,
Thursday, April 20, 2006, 10:46:21 AM, you wrote:
> What happens when you move the cursor to the quoted text and press ALT+L
> (to reflow/rewrap the quoted text).
Forgive me for not being clear enough on this subject...
When I'm referring to quoted text, I mean "replying" to qu
Hello Tim Hamm & everyone else,
on 19-Apr-2006 at 20:33 you (Tim Hamm) wrote:
> Keep in mind I am referring to quoted text only.
What happens when you move the cursor to the quoted text and press ALT+L
(to reflow/rewrap the quoted text).
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - I
Hello Ben,
Thursday, April 20, 2006, 9:49:02 AM, you wrote:
> Are \Utilities\AutoWrap and \Utilities\AutoFormat enabled or disabled,
AutoWrap enabled, AutoFormat disabled during my origianl test. Although, I
recreated the test using one of the same emails that I replied to in
my original test, e
Howdy Tim,
Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 7:33:14 PM, Tim wrotened:
>> Word wrap doesn't automatically wrap quoted text (like whne you are
>> replying),
TH> It seems my original post only had to do with quoted text being wrapped
TH> when replying not pasted text...
TH> W
Hello Thomas,
Thursday, April 20, 2006, 9:06:18 AM, you wrote:
> This doesn't happen here with MicroEd. Which editor are you using?
MicroED... I've run this test several times and this is the pattern
I've witnessed.
--
Best regards,
Timmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Hello Tim,
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:33:14 -0700 GMT (20/04/2006, 01:33 +0700 GMT),
Tim Hamm wrote:
TH> What I found out is that TB follows the formatting of the message you
TH> are replying to regardless if word wrap is activated. So, if the message
TH> you received goes all the way to t
Howdy Tim,
Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 7:46:33 PM, Tim wrotened:
Thomas>>> Word wrap doesn't automatically wrap quoted text (like whne you are
Thomas>>> replying),
Tim> My apologies everyone... it appears I quoted Thomas's reply when it
Tim> should have be an
Hello Tim Hamm & everyone else,
on 19-Apr-2006 at 21:24 you (Tim Hamm) wrote:
>> why is each of your *new* messages to the list marked as "Re:",
>> indicating a reply to a previous message? *puzzled*
> I don't know who put the [2] in the original subject heading...?
Thats TheBat's automatic rep
Hello Tim!
On Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 2:24 PM, you wrote:
> I don't know who put the [2] in the original subject heading...?
Look in Account/Properties/Templates/Reply.
There's a check box for "Use reply numbering in the subject line."
Uncheck it and the numbers will no longer appear.
And t
Hello Alexander,
Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 12:16:34 PM, you wrote:
> why is each of your *new* messages to the list marked as "Re:",
> indicating a reply to a previous message? *puzzled*
I don't know who put the [2] in the original subject heading...?
I've always started out a new messages wi
Hello Tim,
why is each of your *new* messages to the list marked as "Re:",
indicating a reply to a previous message? *puzzled*
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
NP: "Biotron" by Amtinaoüs
(from the 1997 album "Nataraja 2")
__
Hello Ben,
Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 1:38:55 AM, you wrote:
Thomas>> Word wrap doesn't automatically wrap quoted text (like whne you are
Thomas>> replying),
My apologies everyone... it appears I quoted Thomas's reply when it
should have be another member when pointing
Hello Thomas,
Tuesday, April 18, 2006, 10:33:34 PM, you wrote:
> Word wrap doesn't automatically wrap quoted text (like whne you are
> replying),
It seems my original post only had to do with quoted text being wrapped
when replying not pasted text...
What I found out is that TB
Dear Tim,
@19-Apr-2006, 10:32 -0700 (19-Apr 18:32 here) Tim Hamm [TH] in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Thomas:
>> Your sig delimiter doesn't work;
TH> How about this...?
Much better!
--
Cheers -- //.arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator and fellow end user
TB! v3.72.10 (Beta) on Windows XP 5.1
Hello Thomas,
Tuesday, April 18, 2006, 10:33:34 PM, you wrote:
> Your sig delimiter doesn't work;
How about this...?
--
Best regards,
Timmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current version is 3.71.03 | 'Using TBUDL' informati
Hello Ben!
On Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 8:21 AM, you wrote:
> Thomas> Yes, alt-L, sorry. Does wrap pasted text, but you have place the
> Thomas> cursor into the pasted text first. Alt-L works only on the paragraph
> Thomas> in which the cursor is located.
> Yes thats what I mean... it would b
Howdy Thomas,
Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 9:55:25 AM, Thomas wrotened:
Thomas>>> menu item activated. I forgot which, because I wrap manually
Thomas>>> using ctrl-L (everybody works differently).
BA>> Mines Alt-L... Also is doesnt wrap pasted text... which can be
BA>> annoying..
Thomas> Yes, alt
Hello Ben,
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:38:55 +0100 GMT (19/04/2006, 15:38 +0700 GMT),
Ben Allen wrote:
Thomas>> menu item activated. I forgot which, because I wrap manually
Thomas>> using ctrl-L (everybody works differently).
BA> Mines Alt-L... Also is doesnt wrap pasted text... which can be
BA> anno
Howdy Thomas,
Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 6:33:34 AM, Thomas wrotened:
Thomas> Hello Tim,
Thomas> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:27:12 -0700 GMT (19/04/2006, 10:27 +0700 GMT),
Thomas> Tim Hamm wrote:
TH>> Word wrap doesn't seem to work with certain messages when replying
TH&g
Hello Tim,
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:27:12 -0700 GMT (19/04/2006, 10:27 +0700 GMT),
Tim Hamm wrote:
TH> Word wrap doesn't seem to work with certain messages when replying
TH> regularly or with quoted text. For instance; Right now, only 1 of
TH> those 3 messages will word wrap
Hello TBUDL,
Word wrap doesn't seem to work with certain messages when replying
regularly or with quoted text. For instance; Right now, only 1 of
those 3 messages will word wrap work properly with the standard 70
character return. Wrap works fine when creating new message.
--
Re
Batfolk,
With all the discussion about the Windows compatible and the MicroEd editors, I
thought I would have a look at the windows editor again. However I have
discovered a problem with the line length displayed in the editor.
I have text wrapping set at 76 characters, but the text in my edi
Hello Carsten,
> RFC 2822 says:
> | 2.1.1. Line Length Limits
> |
> | There are two limits that this standard places on the number of
> | characters in a line. Each line of characters MUST be no more than
> | 998 characters, and SHOULD be no more than 78 characters, excluding
> | the CRLF
Hi
On Wednesday 10 August 2005 at 4:24:27 PM, in
, A.Translator wrote:
>> http://makeashorterlink.com/?N36A2169B
> I often used tinyurl when referring to a webaddress in a usenet message, but
> learnt recently this is 'not done' because the viewer cannot see where the
> link
> is going...
mak
* ms writes:
> There they say: "Otherwise some e-mail programs will wrap the text at wrong
> points or not wrap it at all" which in my experience is not true (any more).
> I don't know of any popular client (including console "mail" and my mobile
> phone ;-) that does not wrap at all or "at wro
Hello Martin!
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 4:11 PM, you wrote:
>> https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4241
> Well that looks different, but may be the same reason technically.
Anyway, the developers have marked it Resolved (Verify Wait); and it
was February, 2005, long before the current b
Hello Mary,
> I found a report of mis-wrapped quoting--shortened lines rather than
> the long line at the paragraph end in Marin's display. Link:
> https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4241
> Its status is Resolved, Verify Wait.
> Not sure if it is the same thing, but nearest that I could fin
Hello Mary!
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 2:33 PM, you wrote:
> I found a report of mis-wrapped quoting--shortened lines rather than
> the long line at the paragraph end in Marin's display. ...
That should read "Martin's display." Probably careless typing on my
part, but quite reminiscent of th
Hello Mary!
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 2:18 PM, you wrote:
>>> sometimes run out of "pro's". On the other hand there is the
>>> "contra" that text cannot be pasted easily into other apps when
>>> wrapped, and that nowadays nearly every client auto wraps incoming mail
>>> correctly.
>> ...
>>
Hello Martin!
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 2:08 PM, you wrote:
>> For ease of quoting, I chose selective quoting ... 70 characters
>> per line as the standard wrap.
< ... >
> ...and when using selective quoting all is fine. Then I tried replying
> to my own message with "normal" reply and thi
Hello Mary,
Back in TB! again (pheew), I read your message:
> MicroEd here has just wrapped your quotes perfectly.
> For ease of quoting, I chose selective quoting, leaving out the part
> in which you specified 70 characters per line as the standard wrap.
> It happens to be what I use, since kn
Thomas Fernandez stelde de volgende uitleg voor :
A tinyurl is a clear no-no, because it robs me of that
little advance cheat.
Thank you both. I will stop using tinyurls on usenet.
--
Regards,
Adriana.
[ put out the rubbish if you need to reach me by e-mail ]
__
Hello A.Translator,
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 17:24:27 +0200 GMT (10/08/2005, 22:24 +0700 GMT),
A.Translator wrote:
>> It's the first hit in this Google search:
>> http://makeashorterlink.com/?N36A2169B
AT> If I may sidetrack to the shorter link:
AT> I often used tinyurl when referring to a webaddress
Hello A.Translator & everyone else,
on 10-Aug-2005 at 17:24 you (A.Translator) wrote:
> tinyurl
I block everything from the mediaplex servers because of the advertising, I
can't make use of any tinyurl shortcut anyway.
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
Neve
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, at 09:13 AM, ms wrote:
> That's why I asked for a website that specializes on the reasons
> for wrapping: most websites that deal with netiquette only say "do
> this" but they don't point out why very exactly
Try this site. It offers some other insights as wel
Urban stelde dit idée voor :
It's the first hit in this Google search:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?N36A2169B
If I may sidetrack to the shorter link:
I often used tinyurl when referring to a webaddress in a usenet message, but
learnt recently this is 'not done' because the viewer cannot see wh
Thanks, Urban, for your reply!
Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wednesday, August 10, 2005, ms wrote:
>
> > Can someone point me to a good website that cares about this maybe?
>
> Take a look at
> http://www.effectivemeetings.com/productivity/communication/netiquette.asp
>
> It's the first h
Wednesday, August 10, 2005, ms wrote:
> Can someone point me to a good website that cares about this maybe?
Take a look at
http://www.effectivemeetings.com/productivity/communication/netiquette.asp
It's the first hit in this Google search:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?N36A2169B
--
Urban
No me
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, at 08:38 AM, ms wrote:
> But I must admin I seldomly use text from an email that way, so
> thats no argument so far.
This is the key point. You have a system that will not work well in
all circumstances. The current system works well for reading mail but
not copying
Hi Curtis,
>> Is it still considered "good" to have free mass text (not manual
>> ascii-tables, quotes or the like) automatically wrapped at (e.g.) 70
>> characters?
>
> For e-mail, yes.
>
> Most e-mail clients will wrap unformatted text at the window width.
> TB! is one such client. This means
Hello Bat Lovers,
Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 9:00:01 AM, you wrote:
> It's a shorthand phrase to describe these actions:
> 1) Highlight (select) that part of the original message which you wish
>to quote.
Now that is seriously cool!!
--
Chuck Smith
Using The Bat! 3.51.8 on Windows 2000 5
Mary Bull wrote :
1) Highlight (select) that part of the original message which you wish
to quote.
Then do one of two things:
2) Use the F4 key
Thank you. That is the way I usually reply, but I did not realize it was called
selective quoting.
--
Regards,
Adriana.
[ put out the rubbi
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, at 06:05 AM, ms wrote:
> Sorry for this (maybe) silly question, but what do you think:
> Is it still considered "good" to have free mass text (not manual
> ascii-tables, quotes or the like) automatically wrapped at (e.g.) 70
> characters?
For e-mail, yes.
Most e-m
Hallo Mary,
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 08:00:01 -0500GMT (10-8-2005, 15:00 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:
MB> 2) Use the F4 key
MB> or
MB> 2) Hold down the shift key and click on the Reply arrow in the toolbar
or
2) Specials - Reply quoting selected text
--
Groetjes, Roelof
Veni, Vidi, VISA. (I ca
Hello Adriana!
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 7:45 AM, you wrote:
>> For ease of quoting, I chose selective quoting, leaving out the part
>> in which you specified 70 characters per line as the standard wrap.
> Where do I select 'selective quoting', please?
It's a shorthand phrase to describe t
Mary Bull bracht volgend idée uit :
For ease of quoting, I chose selective quoting, leaving out the part
in which you specified 70 characters per line as the standard wrap.
Where do I select 'selective quoting', please?
--
Regards,
Adriana.
[ put out the rubbish if you need to reach me by e-ma
Hello Martin!
On Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 6:05 AM, you wrote:
> In TB! (that I don't use for this mail, as you can see, because its
> not installed on this machine) I have wrapping activated.
MicroEd here has just wrapped your quotes perfectly.
For ease of quoting, I chose selective quoting,
Hi Group,
Sorry for this (maybe) silly question, but what do you think:
Is it still considered "good" to have free mass text (not manual ascii-tables,
quotes or the like) automatically wrapped at (e.g.) 70 characters?
In TB! (that I don't use for this mail, as you can see, because its not
inst
M I C C U L L E N, [MIC] wrote:
> Yeah, I'm running 1280x1024 on a 19" screen, and it looks pretty good @ 9.
> Thanks for the heads-up.
I concur (using same resolution and font size). It's a nice Monospaced
font which kind of looks like Comic Sans Marck will like to hear
that. ;)
However, a
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, at 22:38:27 [GMT+0200] (which was Tue, 4:38 [GMT+800]
Perth, Western Australia) you wrote:
[snips]
Alexander> A late reply, but nevertheless... I just found a rather nice monospaced
Alexander> font in TrueType format - its called "Monaco" and can be found here:
Alexander> htt
Hello Marck D Pearlstone,
27-Jul-2004 14:17, you wrote:
> We have found that a popular mono font is Andale Mono - if you can find
> that one, maybe you'll have a change of heart.
A late reply, but nevertheless... I just found a rather nice monospaced
font in TrueType format - its called "Mon
On Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 4:21:06 PM, Roelof wrote:
RF>> --
RF>> Thanks,
RF>> Rick
RO> I think your signature delimiter is lacking a space.
Hmmm... right you are. I could've sworn I put a space in there. Ahh
well... it should be OK now.
--
Thanks,
Rick
"Not only is the universe stranger than
Hallo Rick,
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:39:47 -0400GMT (28-7-2004, 19:39 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:
Rick>>> 1. Place your roguemoticon in the X-Rogue header (instructions
Rick>>> courtesy of Leif Gregory):
LG>> Errr. I didn't write that. I swear :grin:
RF> Oooops! My mistake! The instruction
On Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 1:01:04 PM, Leif wrote:
LG> Hello Rick,
LG> Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 12:08:54 AM, you wrote:
Rick>> 1. Place your roguemoticon in the X-Rogue header (instructions
Rick>> courtesy of Leif Gregory):
LG> Errr. I didn't write that. I swear :grin:
Oooops! My mistake!
Hello Rick,
Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 12:08:54 AM, you wrote:
Rick> 1. Place your roguemoticon in the X-Rogue header (instructions
Rick> courtesy of Leif Gregory):
Errr. I didn't write that. I swear :grin:
--
Leif Gregory (TB list moderator and fellow end user).
Tagline of the day:
Statis
Hello Mary Bull,
27-Jul-2004 23:59, you wrote:
> I then find Utilities/Format Block (I choose "Left" from this drop-down
> Menu) in the "Edit Mail Message" window extremely helpful. I position the
> cursor anywhere on the long line and click on Format Block/Left, and my
> copy-and-paste is hard-w
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:25:19 GMT, M i c C u l l e n wrote:
> 9Val> And one more - Smart wrapping of quoted text which
> doesn't work in 9Val> Windows editor.
>
> Yep, that's another big plus. Now, if they can just give the
> option of proportional fonts...
Much agreed. That would be a very
Hello M,
MicCullen>>> Now, if they can just give the option of
9Val>>
9Val>> who? :)
MicCullen> THEM!! You know, them. Man, how much clearer could I be? THEM.*
Sounds like pray to known to all gods, whose names shouldn't be said
on public :))
MicCullen> *'Th
On Wednesday, July 28, 2004 @ 7:49:26 PM, 9Val wrote:
[snips]
MicCullen>> Now, if they can just give the option of
9Val>
9Val>who? :)
THEM!! You know, them. Man, how much clearer could I be? THEM.*
MicCullen>> proportional fonts...
Hello M,
MicCullen> Now, if they can just give the option of
who? :)
MicCullen> proportional fonts...
It is impossible because needs full editor rewrite
--
9Val
__
On Wednesday, July 28, 2004 @ 5:29:25 AM, 9Val wrote:
[snips]
9Val> And one more - Smart wrapping of quoted text which doesn't work in
9Val> Windows editor.
Yep, that's another big plus. Now, if they can just give the option of
proportional fonts...
--
cheers, Mic (reply address works)
A
On Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 1:16:21 AM, Peter wrote:
PB> Hello Mary,
PB> Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 2:34:25 PM, you wrote:
>> Can you see us? Can everyone but me see you?
PB> To be perfectly honest Mary I have no idea. Can someone else say if
PB> they can see me or not please?
PB> Thank you.
Hello Mary,
Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 2:34:25 PM, you wrote:
> Can you see us? Can everyone but me see you?
To be perfectly honest Mary I have no idea. Can someone else say if
they can see me or not please?
Thank you.
--
Peter in New Zealand.
___
Hello Peter!
On Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 8:38 PM, you wrote, in part:
PB> Kind regards to all you helpful people out there, and how nice being
PB> able to see your faces, courtesy of the Rogues' Gallery! :-)
Nice to see you, too, in my Roguemoticon data base.
Can you see the rest of us in your h
Hello Allie,
Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 11:07:02 AM, you wrote:
My thanks to everyone who pitched in and made helpful comments about
MicroEd. I think I am converted. I understand it much better after
reading all your posts than I did before. Really, the free caret is a
lot like the "click and type
Peter Ballantyne, [PB] wrote:
> That's a very worth while advantage I had not understood before.
> Thank you for pointing it out. I will try using MicroEd again and
> see if this thread will help me to get a grasp on what I suspect is
> really a very well designed little editor.
Your concern for
Hello Peter!
On Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 4:24 PM, you wrote:
SC>>When would it show up as one long line in an e-mail
SC>> program?
PB> To tell the truth I am not sure, but I occasionally receive emails
PB> that are in one long unwrapped line. I have to scrool for miles
PB> sideways to read them.
Hello Peter,
Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 4:22:08 PM, you wrote:
>>> Would I be correct in assuming that MicroEd has huge potential for
>>> goofing up due to the great number of options avaulable?
>> I'm not certain what you mean by potential for goofing up,
> Sorry, that may be a Kiwi (New Zealand)
Hello 9Val,
9> One of most useful features for me is virtual spaces. Other options
9> (important for me) are auto-wrap, justify on wrap, possibility to
9> change justify of paragraph by one hotkey. And I always know what
9> recipient will get.
And one more - Smart wrapping of q
Hello Dave,
Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 8:14:23 AM, you wrote:
>You know before sending how the
> wrapping will be received by your recipient.
That's a very worth while advantage I had not understood before. Thank
you for pointing it out. I will try using MicroEd again and see if
this thread will
Hello Stuart,
Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 8:28:25 AM, you wrote:
> Hello 9Val,
> Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 2:46:38 PM, you wrote:
PB>>> differences between the two editors has always puzzled me. Does that
PB>>> mean that when I prepare a message using the Windows editor that my
PB>>> recipient will
Hello Dave,
Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 8:14:23 AM, you wrote:
> Hello Peter,
> Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 3:02:59 PM, you wrote:
>> Would I be correct in assuming that MicroEd has huge potential for
>> goofing up due to the great number of options avaulable?
> I'm not certain what you mean by pot
9Val wrote:
9> Hmm, may be I don't know some preferences, but TB! wraps it on
9> the window edge and on high resolution and wide viewer to follow
9> line is un-comfort for my eyes.
Agreed. I'd like to see an option to specify a virtual right margin
for wrapping purposes.
--
George
Using
Hello 9Val,
Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 3:30:28 PM, you wrote:
SC>> I just tested this by sending on long line in the HTML editor and
SC>> sending it to myself and viewing it in plain text viewer and it wraps
SC>> as needed in TB!
9> Hmm, may be I don't know some preferences, but TB! wraps it on
Hello Stuart,
SC> I just tested this by sending on long line in the HTML editor and
SC> sending it to myself and viewing it in plain text viewer and it wraps
SC> as needed in TB!
Hmm, may be I don't know some preferences, but TB! wraps it on the
window edge and on high resolution and wide
Hello 9Val,
Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 2:46:38 PM, you wrote:
PB>> differences between the two editors has always puzzled me. Does that
PB>> mean that when I prepare a message using the Windows editor that my
PB>> recipient will receive it as one long line,
9> Yes, recipient will receive one long li
Hello Peter,
PB> MicroEd once more. I don't use tables, lists, etc. in emails as a
PB> rule, but I do want my recipients to get a message that is easy to
PB> display and read. Would I be correct in assuming that MicroEd has huge
PB> potential for goofing up due to the great number of options avau
Hello Peter,
Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 3:02:59 PM, you wrote:
> Would I be correct in assuming that MicroEd has huge potential for
> goofing up due to the great number of options avaulable?
I'm not certain what you mean by potential for goofing up, but the
really nice thing about MicroEd is that
Hello 9Val,
Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 7:46:38 AM, you wrote:
> Hello Peter,
PB>> differences between the two editors has always puzzled me. Does that
PB>> mean that when I prepare a message using the Windows editor that my
PB>> recipient will receive it as one long line,
> Yes, recipient will
Hello Peter,
PB> differences between the two editors has always puzzled me. Does that
PB> mean that when I prepare a message using the Windows editor that my
PB> recipient will receive it as one long line,
Yes, recipient will receive one long line
PB> or will their email
PB> program wrap it for
Hello Allie,
Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 12:15:04 AM, you wrote:
>MicroEd is special in that when it
> wraps as you type, it hard wraps.
> The Windows editor for TB! was introduced so that those who don't like
> the cursor behaviour as well as other aspects of MicroEd could have a
> more familiar
Hello Allie,
On Tuesday, July 27, 2004, at 16:40 Lithuanian Time, you wrote:
AM> It's the fonts that are often ugly. I use BitStream Vera Sans Mono
AM> which is fine for the characters I tend to type.
This BitStream Vera family looks good, however it has one very big
shortcomig (for me at least)
On Tuesday, July 27, 2004 @ 9:40:01 PM, Allie Martin wrote:
[snips]
>> I'll try it for a few days and see how I go. Sure is ugly though.
Allie> It's the fonts that are often ugly.
Ain't that the truth!!! As a journalist, I tend to worry about HOW it looks
as well as the information contained,
M I C C U L L E N, [MIC] wrote:
> I'll try it for a few days and see how I go. Sure is ugly though.
It's the fonts that are often ugly. I use BitStream Vera Sans Mono
which is fine for the characters I tend to type.
If you wish to try it you can send me a note offlist.
--
-=[ Allie Martin ]=-
On Tuesday, July 27, 2004 @ 8:17:38 PM, Marck D Pearlstone wrote:
[snips]
Marck> Dear M,
Sounds like James Bond :-)
Marck> @27-Jul-2004, 19:55 +0800 (27-Jul 12:55 UK time) M i c C u l l e n
Marck> said to tbudl:
>> I'd like my lines to wrap at about 80 characters, but can't
>> seem to get it t
1 - 100 of 212 matches
Mail list logo
