On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 04:34:03AM -0500, Aaron Schrab wrote:
> At 23:04 -0400 10 May 2001, adam morley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 12:43:28AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > > format=flowed requires a lot more implementation than just adding a
> > > content-type header, iirc.
>
> I wouldn't really say "a lot more" (at least when not dealing with
> quoted text), but definitely more.
>
> > well, if i write my messages so they are wrapped like this as you will
>
> You mean not wrapped.
sorry, ive been talking about this too long with others, it starts to run together in
my head.
>
> > see in one second, then it can be classified as a flowed message. a
>
> I suppose it *could* be classified as such, but I don't see much point
> in doing so. The whole point of format=flowed is so that paragraphs
> will wrap in programs that support it, but still be readable with
> programs that don't do wrapping.
well, the whole point is that ppl dont like unwrapped text. so one solution has been
format=flowed.
any others?
>
> It also doesn't follow part of RFC 2646:
thats a should clause. not a must
>
> ] When generating Format=Flowed text, lines SHOULD be shorter than 80
> ] characters. As suggested values, any paragraph longer than 79
>
> Your nested quoting was also done incorrectly. According to section 4.5
> of RFC 2646 there should be no space between the '>' marks at the start
> of quoted lines.
that, my friend was mutts doing, not mine. so if someone could explain why/how to
change that, then thanks!
>
> --
> Aaron Schrab [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.execpc.com/~aarons/
> ... very sad life. Probably have very sad death but at least there
> is symmetry. -- Zathras
--
thanks
adam
any and all ideas herein are the sole property of the author, with no implied
warranties or guarantees. unless its somebody else's already.
