On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:42:43PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: > On 2001-05-11 15:59:30 -0400, adam morley wrote: > > >ah, no line *should* be longer than 78 chras, correct? its a > >should, not a must if i remember. > > Which means that you shouldn't violate this unless you have a very > good reason (such as a long word) to violate it. my point is the reason for not violating said should clause is archaic. my reason is that if your mail reader can't handle it, step into the 21st century and get a reader that knows how to wrap text. > > -- > Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.org/ -- 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.
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Sam Roberts
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Thomas Roessler
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Thomas Roessler
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Thomas Roessler
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Thomas Roessler
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... rex
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley