On 23/12/2005 at 12:36:18 PM [GMT -0500], Luca wrote: > That means that TB's Windows-like editor is useless, plain and simple. If > there is no way to send messages with correct line wrapping, one can't use it, > and I can't see any point in putting it in.
Depends on perspective I guess. Though my sentiments are as yours, there are those who believe sent lines should not be wrapped. In this way, the recipient can view the lines whichever way he wishes. In fact, there's a new RFC that tries to address this issue of line wrapping that works for all, i.e., sender and recipient. > I myself got used to MicroEd, with time, but a friend of mine, coming from > Outlook, of course he can't bear alt+l, nor the auto-format feature the way it > works in MicroEd. He *needs* a Windows-like text editor, and I myself would > like a lot to get rid of alt+l. Unlike the Windows editor that handles like 'standard' Windows editors, it doesn't really work. However, MicroEd *works*, but has an unfamiliar handle to it. What made me grow accustomed to MicroEds quirky handling was the fact it works extremely well for e-mail formatting. You can trust that what you see in front of you is what the recipient will get. > If a way to put hard returns in the right place before sending can't > be found, with the Windows-like editor, then I'd say that TB has three > editors but none of them is completely usable. The only way to do that is manually, sort of like in the old days of mechanical type writers. You don't have a 'ching' sound to give you the cue, but you could use set the Window width to the desired line length. :) -- -= Curtis =- The Bat! v3.64.01 Christmas Edition / http://specs.aimlink.name PGPKey: http://rsakey.aimlink.name ...I have enough trouble single-tasking! ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.62.14 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
