Re: replies and cutlines
On Fri 14 November 2003, 4:02:26 +1000, Ken Green wrote:
> I think I figured out what your template is doing. If I change %Quotes
> to %Text in my top-posting QT, I can achieve what you are describing.
>
> This does leave out the quote delimiters (>) but I guess I can't have
> everything... I certainly don't want to attempt a regex template that
> inserted multi-leveled quote marks. ;)
You could get what you want by downloading Andrew Perevodchik's macro plugins
from http://en.barin.com.au/soft/mymacros and using his prefix macro. I think
you'd then need to have
%PREFIX("> ","%Text")
in the appropriate place in your QT
--
Robin Anson
Using The Bat! v2.01.3 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Service Pack 1
Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Hello Mark,
> However, expecting TB to ignore cut marks would be asking the
> developers to violate RFC-2646 in much the same way that Microsoft's
> developers did with OE.
I may have missed it but I haven't seen where RFC-2646 says that cut
marks and text below have to be ignored when quoting. All I have seen (I
browsed quite quickly over the full text of the RFC) is:
,- [ 4.3. Usenet Signature Convention ]
| There is a convention in Usenet news of using "-- " as the separator
| line between the body and the signature of a message. When generating a
| Format=Flowed message containing a Usenet-style separator before the
| signature, the separator line is sent as-is. This is a special case; an
| (optionally quoted) line consisting of DASH DASH SP is not considered
| flowed.
`-
All it says is that the separator line is sent as is, with the space at
the end. And it also says "optionally quoted". Which, to me, means that
I should be able to quote it if I wish.
On the other hand, it seems that item '4.5.- Quoting' establishes the
"standard" of the ">" prefix for quoted text, and it says:
,- [ ]
| ... the canonical quote indicator (or quote mark) is one or more close
| angle bracket (">") characters. Lines which start with the quote
| indicator are considered quoted. The number of ">" characters at the
| start of the line specifies the quote depth.
`-
Great! Why does TB allow to include initials and even full names before
the ">" quote prefix? Aren't the developers then _violating_ the same
RFC? Also, if TB allows me to change the quote prefix to any character I
want by using the %QUOTESTYLE macro, are they violating the RFC? No, I
don't think so.
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v2.01.3
Winamp OFF:
Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
On Thursday, November 13, 2003, 4:40:15 PM, ken green wrote: > It's pretty close. I have QTs that allow me to top or bottom post. But > the problem I run into is that once the cut mark and text below is > deleted from a reply, that text is gone. I guess I need to fiddle with > my templates. Use the %OTEXT macro instead of %QUOTES in your reply. This quotes the full text, including the sig. I have this in my business top quoting template, as below: == Original Message === Date: %ODateEn at %OTimeLongEn From: %OFROMNAME (%OFROMADDR) Subject: %OSUBJ %otext === End of Original Message === Julian -- Using The Bat! v2.01.3 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Robin Anson wrote: > For business use I have a QT that creates a top post message like this one. I think I figured out what your template is doing. If I change %Quotes to %Text in my top-posting QT, I can achieve what you are describing. This does leave out the quote delimiters (>) but I guess I can't have everything... I certainly don't want to attempt a regex template that inserted multi-leveled quote marks. ;) Still... (I can't let it go...) the behavior of TB's selective quoting still baffles me. If highlighting text + F4 worked consistently, Quick Templates wouldn't be necessary, and I'd get the formatting I desire. -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Robin Anson wrote: > For business use I have a QT that creates a top post message like this one. It > mimics Lookout, 'cos that's what my business contacts are used to. This keeps > cut marks and any other rubbish that is sent to me. Thanks. Please send it to me. I assume you mean "Outlook" - Lookout appears to be a Palm-based PIM (but what a great name for a PIM! :) > Is that what you want to do? It's pretty close. I have QTs that allow me to top or bottom post. But the problem I run into is that once the cut mark and text below is deleted from a reply, that text is gone. I guess I need to fiddle with my templates. -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Mark Wieder wrote: > However, expecting TB to ignore cut marks would be asking the > developers to violate RFC-2646 in much the same way that Microsoft's > developers did with OE. You are missing my point entirely. I don't expect TB to *always* ignore cut marks. I like the feature 95% of the time. But if software is designed to allow a user to highlight a block of text to quote in a reply, THEN THAT BLOCK SHOULD BE IN THE REPLY. In other words, if I want to go "non-standard" for 5% of my replies, and the functionality I desire is certainly *implied* (highlight text, F4), I should be able to do so. Would you use a similar argument (violate standards) if The Bat! did not easily allow top-posting? What about HTML/Rich Text? Standards are great, and I support adhering to agreed-upon standards. Unfortunately, not everyone I deal with supports the same standards, so I have to make exceptions and deal with it. This list illustrates the "diversity of standards" on a weekly basis: how many times does the cut mark issue (dash-dash-space-newline) get explained here per week? My desire to easily/quickly include all the text I select for a reply doesn't appear to be one that is going to be "solved" - the suggested workarounds are fine, I suppose. But I can't imagine any explanation that would change my mind regarding the F4 quoting functionality: if F4 is designed to use the highlighted text a user selects for a reply, then use what the user selects! Don't make a cut mark decision for me if I have explicitly selected text that includes a cut mark! Don't try to tell me that what I want to do is non-standard. I *know* the reply I'm trying to create is non-standard e-mail correspondence. But what about software design and usability standards? -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Ken For business use I have a QT that creates a top post message like this one. It mimics Lookout, 'cos that's what my business contacts are used to. This keeps cut marks and any other rubbish that is sent to me. Is that what you want to do? Moderators - I know this is a top posting that goes against the list rules, but there is a point to it!! Robin -- Robin Anson The hardness of the butter is proportional to the softness of the bread. ---Original Message From : ken green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: replies and cutlines Date : Thursday, 13 November 2003 Time : 4:43 Marck D Pearlstone wrote: > This is how you should do it. Also, you should *not* use a cut mark in > such circumstances. It's been awhile since there was a reply to this thread, but I realized that while there was some fun discussion of posting principles, my problem was not actually solved. While I certainly appreciate TB's method of stripping everything after the cut mark, I am trying to find a way to *NOT* strip below the cut mark. If it's a few extra steps, that's OK - but I can't understand why it cannot be done somewhat easily. I am reminded of MS Word's attempt to "make things easier" by automating so many things. Sometimes I don't *WANT* that!! What I want to do is have the ability to reply to someone and keep the message history intact. So if there is more than one reply from me, TB will still keep everything - ignoring the cut marks. Marck, if I am to understand your comment "you should *not* use a cut mark" then I would have to plan ahead or make a good guess as to what kind of e-mail correspondence I'm going to have *ahead of time* - and this isn't feasible. I don't always know when I'm going to need a message history. And since TB does not allow me to directly edit messages, I cannot go back and delete or alter cut marks *before* replying. So if I don't guess right at the beginning of a conversation, I'm out of luck. Arrrgh!! This is aggravating. Currently, when I need to quote multiple responses that include cut marks, I forward the message, change the Subject line (FW to RE), delete the "forwarded message" line at the top and the "end forwarded message" line at the bottom. Then send. Not exactly elegant. Why, oh why can't I simply highlight the *ENTIRE* message (all responses, cut marks, etc.) and hit F4? Logically, this should work. If I want to use selective reply - and I select EVERYTHING - why is TB not following its own logic? The Bat's over-zealousness with deleting after cut marks is causing me problems. Again, I am reminded of Word "features" that drive me nuts like this. OK, great feature now how do I TURN IT OFF!?! -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
ken- Wednesday, November 12, 2003, 9:43:49 AM, you wrote: kg> The Bat's over-zealousness with deleting after cut marks is causing me kg> problems. Again, I am reminded of Word "features" that drive me nuts kg> like this. OK, great feature now how do I TURN IT OFF!?! Well, basically Simon has laid out the sequence of events that will do what you want. However, expecting TB to ignore cut marks would be asking the developers to violate RFC-2646 in much the same way that Microsoft's developers did with OE. -- -Mark Wieder Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Simon wrote: > To do what you are wanting I usually highlight the whole message body, > hit CTRL+C then deselect, hit F4 and paste into the new message. It > doesn't fix your problem but maybe it is a little quicker. Thanks. I've done that before, and will probably use that again since it's faster than doing the Forward method I described. The problem is that the copied text is not clearly marked as a reply. Another method is to highlight everything after the first cut mark, copying and pasting that after hitting F4. By the way, it is not necessary to to deselect in your example above. Hitting F4 with nothing selected or hitting F4 with the entire message history (multiple replies) selected results in the same content in the editor. This is precisely what bugs me about The Bat's over-zealousness with regard to cut marks - it over-rules its own logic of selective reply. Convention and cut mark etiquette notwithstanding, if I purposely select text, then that text should be included in the reply when I hit F4. Period. Poor design, IMO. -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello ken, On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:43:49 -0600 your time, you said: kg> Why, oh why can't I simply highlight the *ENTIRE* message (all kg> responses, cut marks, etc.) and hit F4? Logically, this should kg> work. If I want to use selective reply - and I select EVERYTHING - kg> why is TB not following its own logic? To do what you are wanting I usually highlight the whole message body, hit CTRL+C then deselect, hit F4 and paste into the new message. It doesn't fix your problem but maybe it is a little quicker. - -- Slán, Simon @ i~n+f~o+w~i+z~a+r~d+.~c+o~.+u~k * PGP Key via Web: http://pgp.infowizard.co.uk/ PGP Key via Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Faffing about with TB! v1.62r on W2K SP4 #726. Ail Qed My Row Ussr ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Protect your Privacy with PGP. Comment: KeyID: 0xDF8062C1 Comment: Fingerprint: 40DD 7908 9DF8 634F 1B98 8849 9266 C870 DF80 62C1 iQA/AwUBP7J2h5JmyHDfgGLBEQL2OACdEgogSgdUfghJpn+RAVG7lqUY1yEAoMfx 9RDte4HZRbwsIZXM2JayVdl+ =q8/A -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Marck D Pearlstone wrote: > This is how you should do it. Also, you should *not* use a cut mark in > such circumstances. It's been awhile since there was a reply to this thread, but I realized that while there was some fun discussion of posting principles, my problem was not actually solved. While I certainly appreciate TB's method of stripping everything after the cut mark, I am trying to find a way to *NOT* strip below the cut mark. If it's a few extra steps, that's OK - but I can't understand why it cannot be done somewhat easily. I am reminded of MS Word's attempt to "make things easier" by automating so many things. Sometimes I don't *WANT* that!! What I want to do is have the ability to reply to someone and keep the message history intact. So if there is more than one reply from me, TB will still keep everything - ignoring the cut marks. Marck, if I am to understand your comment "you should *not* use a cut mark" then I would have to plan ahead or make a good guess as to what kind of e-mail correspondence I'm going to have *ahead of time* - and this isn't feasible. I don't always know when I'm going to need a message history. And since TB does not allow me to directly edit messages, I cannot go back and delete or alter cut marks *before* replying. So if I don't guess right at the beginning of a conversation, I'm out of luck. Arrrgh!! This is aggravating. Currently, when I need to quote multiple responses that include cut marks, I forward the message, change the Subject line (FW to RE), delete the "forwarded message" line at the top and the "end forwarded message" line at the bottom. Then send. Not exactly elegant. Why, oh why can't I simply highlight the *ENTIRE* message (all responses, cut marks, etc.) and hit F4? Logically, this should work. If I want to use selective reply - and I select EVERYTHING - why is TB not following its own logic? The Bat's over-zealousness with deleting after cut marks is causing me problems. Again, I am reminded of Word "features" that drive me nuts like this. OK, great feature now how do I TURN IT OFF!?! -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: replies and cutlines
Hi Allie Sunday, October 12, 2003, 2:48:00 PM, you wrote: AM> I meant if you wish to change only your signature +/- your message header AM> information without disturbing any of the message body which you've already AM> edited, then you couldn't use the %Clear macro, but instead would have to AM> use the %ISSIGNATURE macro. I see. Thanks for your help. Cheers, -- Vishal Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Vishal, [V] wrote: AM>> If you wish to be selective with signature and header information AM>> changes, then you can replace a signature by adding %issignature in AM>> your signature quick template, in addition to the header change AM>> macros like %From="" and %Replyto="" V> What do you mean by "be selective with signature and header V> information changes"? I meant if you wish to change only your signature +/- your message header information without disturbing any of the message body which you've already edited, then you couldn't use the %Clear macro, but instead would have to use the %ISSIGNATURE macro. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: replies and cutlines
Hi Allie Sunday, October 12, 2003, 11:22:26 AM, you wrote: AM> If you wish to toppost, then you need to change your template before AM> editing since the %clear macro completely deletes all the text in the AM> body text field of the editor. I see. AM> If you wish to be selective with signature and header information AM> changes, then you can replace a signature by adding %issignature in AM> your signature quick template, in addition to the header change macros AM> like %From="" and %Replyto="" What do you mean by "be selective with signature and header information changes"? Cheers, -- Vishal Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Vishal, [V] wrote: V> Just the original template output and NOT anything else we have V> written in the mail text so far, right? I wouldn't want my whole V> email wiped out if I decide to change signatures at the end. If you wish to toppost, then you need to change your template before editing since the %clear macro completely deletes all the text in the body text field of the editor. If you wish to be selective with signature and header information changes, then you can replace a signature by adding %issignature in your signature quick template, in addition to the header change macros like %From="" and %Replyto="" -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: replies and cutlines
Hi Allie Sunday, October 12, 2003, 3:54:27 AM, you wrote: AM> The key to such a template is the use of the %Clear macro which erases the AM> original template output and replaces it with the new one. Just the original template output and NOT anything else we have written in the mail text so far, right? I wouldn't want my whole email wiped out if I decide to change signatures at the end. Cheers, -- Vishal Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Vishal, [V] wrote: kg>> And I have TB Quick templates that can kg>> switch between top and bottom with a few keystrokes. V> I'm interested in this..where could I find these templates? The key to such a template is the use of the %Clear macro which erases the original template output and replaces it with the new one. This is the one that I use for software or other support queries. I top post in these instances since most support departments ask for it in the interest of record keeping. This reproduces the Outlook style of top posting. 8<=== %Clear%- %Qinclude="mydate" %Cursor -- Regards, Allie Martin ---Original Message From : %FromName <%FromAddr> To : %ToName Subject: %OSUBJ Date : %ODate Time : %OTIME %TEXT ===8<= -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
12-Okt-2003 09:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: kg>> Hmmm... I disagree slightly. I would say that people who use Outlook kg>> generally top post in the format you describe because that is the kg>> default behavior of Outlook. > There is a little program that gets around the default top post > behaviour of Outlook Express (not sure about outlook). I think it's > called "Outlook Express Quote Fix" or something like that. Yes. But it sometimes doesn't help since Outlook is pre-configured to generate HTML/RTF mails. The quotefix will only work with plain text. Nevertheless, its a start. Here's the links, pass it on! ;-) For Outlook Express: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ For Outlook: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/ -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de) It's a pity that taxpayers don't read science fiction. They might know about the age they're buying. -- Frederick Pohl Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: replies and cutlines
Hi ken Friday, October 10, 2003, 11:02:01 PM, you wrote: kg> And I have TB Quick templates that can kg> switch between top and bottom with a few keystrokes. I'm interested in this..where could I find these templates? Cheers, -- Vishal Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Hello Ken! On Friday, October 10, 2003, 11:53 PM, you wrote, in part: k> The fact that the mods use templates for the reminders is brilliant. Totally agree about the templates. See my posted reply to Thomas on tbot. (Are you subscribed there? Very useful list. ) Sorry I got sleepy and went off to bed before I could read your courteous reply last night. :) -- Best regards, Mary The Bat! 2.00.6 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Mary Bull wrote: k>> ... Thankfully this list has picked one method (it's bottom, k>> right?) > No, it is "interlined." In a short reply, with only one relevant > section quoted and the comment below, it looks like "bottom posting." > But the method is more like conversation than it is like replying to a > letter. Umm.. sorry about that. I was being a smart-ass, trying to be clever, and failing miserably. My "it's bottom, right?" comment was purely in jest, as this list uses what I would definitely call bottom posting. I understand the concept of interlined or interspersed quoting and commenting, but for me (at least in my cloudy gray mind), that's what I call bottom posting. It is quite a rare occasion for me to see someone refer to multiple points and put their response all the way at the bottom only (and not after each section) that way top-posters might. When I think of "bottom posting" I think of it as posting replies beneath (at the bottom of) relevant comments. What you did in your response, and what I'm about to do now > I think so, too. It's not about the individual subscriber's personal > preference. It's about the entire community, and especially about the > decisions of the moderators for the good of the community. That, and being a little thick-skinned. I saw some posts recently that mentioned moderators being rude in their public reminders of list protocol. I wanted to chime in on the thread, but most of the people in that discussion said it better than I could anyway. The only real point I wanted to make then - and it applies here too - is that being a little less sensitive seems to work really well with mailing lists. For me, that means just doing what the group wants. I don't have the time or energy to wage a battle about how I think top-posting makes sense (that's just an example and not a reflection of what I actually believe). I think we're saying the same thing basically. I'm just being long-winded and more confusing about it... ;) > There will always be new subscribers who need reminding and old ones, > also, from time to time. But, as you noted, Ken, being consistent in > format is a virtue here. :) The fact that the mods use templates for the reminders is brilliant. It removes the emotional aspect, so if one is having a bad day, just stubbed his toe, or broke up with girlfriend/boyfriend - they don't have to fire off a self-righteous bomb to blow off some steam. (anyone who has participated on more than 1 or 2 lists/groups knows exactly what I'm talking about). -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Hello Ken! On Friday, October 10, 2003, 10:02 PM, you wrote: MDP>> Usually a top post (what you are describing) does *not* use MDP>> quote prefixing and instead quotes the entire original message MDP>> below the signature in a format like this: k> ... Thankfully this list has picked one method (it's bottom, k> right?) No, it is "interlined." In a short reply, with only one relevant section quoted and the comment below, it looks like "bottom posting." But the method is more like conversation than it is like replying to a letter. When you get time, re-read the "Welcome" message. k> ... and sticks with it. ... That this list is 'strict' about its chosen k> method is a good thing, IMO. I think so, too. It's not about the individual subscriber's personal preference. It's about the entire community, and especially about the decisions of the moderators for the good of the community. I have friends, and one relative in particular, who want to correspond as if in a series of snail-mail letters, with the entire current series appended below, in a succession of top posts. I do this with them. It was the only way I knew, until I joined TBUDL. Like everyone who encounters TBUDL's way for the first time, I wanted to talk about it and argue about it. But I cooperated. Now, after almost a year, list protocol or not, it's my preferred way for e-mail correspondence. But as I said above, the list protocol is not about individual members' personal philosophies or ways of handling things or preferences. k> ... And I have TB Quick templates that can switch between top and k> bottom with a few keystrokes. I put my template in the AB address entry for my sister and those friends who use top posting--mostly people still with Outlook or Outlook Express, and a few (hold your nose) with Incredimail. :) I'm writing a little less concisely here than the ideal of the "Welcome" message, but the list is slow tonight. And I think, also, that my reply to you makes for an illustration of "interlined" posting. (I hope I'm using the right term, Marck, Leif, Allie.) There will always be new subscribers who need reminding and old ones, also, from time to time. But, as you noted, Ken, being consistent in format is a virtue here. :) -- Best regards, Mary The Bat! 2.00.6 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
On Friday, October 10, 2003 at 11:02:01 PM, ken green wrote in the message "replies and cutlines" <mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I can see good reasons for both top and bottom posting. Really. And I > love to argue. Thankfully this list has picked one method (it's bottom, > right?) and sticks with it. I'm much more in favor of consistency than > I am with top or bottom. That this list is 'strict' about its chosen > method is a good thing, IMO. Yes. I agree. Consistency makes everything much easier to understand. -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. In a Restaurant window: "Don't stand there and be hungry, come on in and get fed up." Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Marck D Pearlstone wrote: > Usually a top post (what you are describing) does > *not* use quote prefixing and instead quotes the entire original > message below the signature in a format like this: Hmmm... I disagree slightly. I would say that people who use Outlook generally top post in the format you describe because that is the default behavior of Outlook. Using a prefix character (>, :, etc.) for quoted text is pretty common from what I have seen (including just about every web-based mail client I have played around with). And that is independent of top (or bottom) posting. In fact, I use a reply template for business mail that mimics the Outlook-style headers quote, but I also use the '>' symbol in front of those headers and the quoted text. I sense that the top-posting vs. bottom-posting has the potential of religious fervor, but I'm not convinced it even matters that much. I end up using whatever method I think will get my message across best. I don't care what anyone says about bottom posting being "right" - I experience top-posting a whole lot more in my business and personal e-mail alike. And while I'm very aware that frequency and/or popularity does not make something right or better, I do know that my ultimate goal is to have people understand the message I am sending them. I gave up the fight for ASCII e-mail a long time ago, even though I'll go to my grave holding onto the idea that HTML does NOT belong in e-mail. I know I'm right about this :) but cannot ignore the simple fact that HTML and rich text mail is more and more common. And no matter how hard or how long I preach of its evils, if I am to continue using e-mail, I will likely see more and more HTML mail. The Bat - thankfully - provides a beautiful interface for not dealing with HTML e-mail, so this particular issue is moot for me now anyway. I can see good reasons for both top and bottom posting. Really. And I love to argue. Thankfully this list has picked one method (it's bottom, right?) and sticks with it. I'm much more in favor of consistency than I am with top or bottom. That this list is 'strict' about its chosen method is a good thing, IMO. I belong to a motorcycle list where half the people top post and the other half bottom post. I just shrug my shoulders and reply using whatever method the author used. And I have TB Quick templates that can switch between top and bottom with a few keystrokes. -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Hello John, Friday, October 10, 2003, 8:51:59 AM, you wrote: JLC> Can someone point me to the RFC that describes the posting rules JLC> people are talking about? I'm not sure you're mixing your request. The TB list rules are very specific concerning top-posting, which is at: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/subtbudl.txt You also received this when you subscribed in the welcome message. However, if you're looking for an actual RFC, then 1855 is the one concerning netiquette. It's at: http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html JLC> If someone can point me to the RFC that say's that top posting is JLC> wrong then I may attempt to change my writing style:) It's not quite so much black and white. Wrong or Right. It's what the majority of people consider to be acceptable. Like writing (actual letters) to a friend would be different from a letter you'd write to a business. You could write to a business (maybe a cover letter for a job application) like you would write one to a friend, but I doubt that you'd be high on the list for an interview at that point. -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.00.22 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Hello Ken, Been a little busy so haven't managed to follow the thread..shame on me Can someone point me to the RFC that describes the posting rules people are talking about? If someone can point me to the RFC that say's that top posting is wrong then I may attempt to change my writing style:) JC Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Hello ken, > I know that TB's discarding of everything below a cutline is a great > feature. But what happens if I *don't* want that behavior to occur? Don't use the %Quotes macro then in your reply template. For example, for top posting correspondence, which will include _all_ previous messages, this is the template I use: %Cursor -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech - Original Message - From: %OFromName <%OFromAddr> Date: %ODateEn %OTimeLongEn Subject: %OFULLSUBJ %TEXT HTH -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain) Using The Bat! v2.00.6 Winamp OFF: Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: replies and cutlines
Hi Ken, @10-Oct-2003, 09:03 -0500 (15:03 UK time) ken green [K] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to TBUDL: K> Aside from a full-on crusade to get the rest of the world to K> follow posting and cutline rules, is there a better way to do K> what I am describing? Yes. A custom template for that recipient that uses a real "top post" format. Usually a top post (what you are describing) does *not* use quote prefixing and instead quotes the entire original message below the signature in a format like this: - Original message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] date: (whenever) Subject: blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah - End message - This is how you should do it. Also, you should *not* use a cut mark in such circumstances. You would achieve this format with a template like this: ,--/ TopPost template \-- Dear %TOFNAME, %Cursor %QINCLUDE="MySig"%- - Original message - From: %ofromaddr date: %odate Subject: %osubj %text - End message - `-\ End template /- -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.00.22 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
replies and cutlines
I know that TB's discarding of everything below a cutline is a great feature. But what happens if I *don't* want that behavior to occur? I haven't figured out a way to include a message with more than one response. For example: I am following up on a software request to a developer. I am selecting the last message I sent, using Reply All and deleting my own address from From. I want to quote my last reply as well as the developer's message that I had replied to. But there doesn't seem to be an easy way to do that with TB. I've tried regular Reply and selective Reply (F4) but both methods remove the developer's message as it falls below the cutline in my signature. (yes, they are using top-posting and not removing signature/cutlines... shame on them.. yadda yadda..) Even if someone else is doing it "wrong" this behavior seems a bit count-intuitive to highlight a block of text, press F4, and only have half of what I've highlighted show up in the reply. It's like The Bat is enforcing its own belief about cutlines no matter what I do! Forwarding the message does not work, as the format and quoting isn't what I want for a reply. My current work-around is to reply (which only gets the topmost post), then go back and forward the message, copying the second message down (developer's message) and pasting it below what the Reply grabbed. Aside from a full-on crusade to get the rest of the world to follow posting and cutline rules, is there a better way to do what I am describing? -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.00.6 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
