Alexander S. Kunz: > on 23-Dez-2005 at 12:53 you (Luca) wrote: > > But if I write a message using the Windows-like editor, lines wrappings get > > lost as soon as I save the message. Then, recipients get a message with > > lines > > as long as the whole paragraph. > > I'm not sure but from my POV it is correct that there are no hard > linebreaks in these messages.
The Windows-like editor could come in handy when users don't need the advanced features of MicroEd, so they can't see any reason why they should suffer the pains of alt+(hel)l. But if it's correct to use MicroEd to write and send plain text messages /with/ line wrappings, I can't see why it's correct to send them /without/ line wrappings, only because I use another editor. They're just plain text messages in both cases, if there's a reason to wrap lines at 72, it stands even when I change editor. > However, TB doesn't add the correct > Content-Type header for this type of messages (from which the recipients > MUA can determine that it should wrap the lines accordingly). > > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="<whatever>"; > format=flowed; > delsp=yes This is interesting as a workaround. Adding these ones as custom fields in TB should solve the problem, at least with certain recipients, right? But how many mail readers can correctly handle them? > Here's the bug report: > https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=5016 Thanx, I was looking up in the wrong category ("editor" instead of "mail management"). By the way ... Merry Christmas to all, here :-) -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.64.01 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
