Hello Bruno!
On Friday, December 27, 2002 at 3:16:48 PM you wrote:
> I think many problems, such as editor preference, stem from comments
> such as a and b above. Who's definition of "natural" has been used to
> qualify TB's usage?
Not you and I. The sentences you quoted are marketing claims, not
scientifically proven ones. Which I think is obvious and not to
discuss.
> We agree that the Agent editor has many shortcomings but also has a
> number of strengths.
Don't know why this paragraph was in, I never doubted Agent's
abilities. Whenever someone comes up with "add news capabilities to
TB" I strongly recommend Agent for that.
> Alas, you're now confusing e-mail with text composition.
No. Go back to my original message and you will see that I don't.
>> So, you cannot just make up a paragraph by one new line, you need two.
> Says who? You can easily make a new paragraph in agent with a single
> new line. This is all in implementation.
My sentence is an observation, not a god-given principle.
>> Which has become standard even in business letters
> Oh oh.... Someone bringing up "standards" while trying to make an
> argument against the very use of them.
Whatever you say here about me is
a) wrong
b) derogatory.
I don't care if TB's editor uses any presumed standards, I want it to
work properly under certain conditions. which it does, especially
considering e-mail.
> Must be because your viewer isn't smart enough to wrap those lines. :)
No, look at the context of my rhetorical question and you'll easily
see that it is certain mailers (like OE/OL, although not exclusively
them and not under all circumstances) don't use LB/CR at the end of
a line.
> How often do I make a table in an email message? Not very often.
So, now we are down to, "I don't do it, so leave it".
> Don't take away my freedoms in using a program because you don't
> think it's convenient for you. I don't find it very convenient
> having to constantly ALT-L.
You can use whatever you want. As I want to use what I want. What I
don't want is a variety of programmes behaving alike; that is not the
point of "choice". If someone wants HTML mail composition, use a
mailer who can do it, not TB. You don't like the editor *and* are not
comfortable with the reasons others give why they like it *and* don't
want the advice of how you can achieve what you want, go use another
mailer.
That's why we need different [sic!] e-mail clients (this applies to
every artefact).
> But that functionality does seem tied to the incorrect function. It
> would more logically be tied to auto-wrap (because that's what it's
> doing) rather than auto-format.
I am not in the least interested of which function should be labeled
how. Yes, I'd like companies to try to make up useful labels, I'd like
to have an easy way through a programme, car, cell phone, digital
camera, computer.
But that wasn't the point here, I just tried to show you (or whoever)
how to achieve what you want.
> I will point you back to your own comments regarding Agent. Really,
> follow along. :) Composition can be presented in any way a software
> author wants. There are really no limits with this. The relationship
> between composition and final text can be as similar or as obscure as
> a software author would like it to be.
And Marck and I tried to argue why it is a good idea to see during
composition how the end product looks like. ever heard the term
"WYSIWYG"?
>> It's a feature, yes. It's wrong, no. It doesn't fit your needs, maybe.
> He, and others, including myself, are telling you is most definitely
> does not suit our needs. No maybe about it. It is "wrong" only in
> the sense that it does not follow normal conventions.
<cut>
> I consider a shortcoming.
Second first: Me not.
Whatever you consider "normal conventions" ... others may not.
Consider a thought experiment, a so-called "other world": If TB's
editor had been there before Word and become more popular (through
which ways ever), the normal convention would be TB's behaviour.
> It's pretty clear already. The bottom line is that everyone (I hope)
> using the program has paid to do so. It is completely within reason
> to want a little bit more from your investment.
Well, I paid for a programme "as is", not because it may in the future
be what I want it to be.
--
Dierk Haasis
The Bat 1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 2600Service Pack 1
Todo, pero con manera (Everything, but with civility.).
________________________________________________
Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
