On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 05:43:41PM -0400, John Hawkinson wrote: > John Hawkinson <jh...@alum.mit.edu> wrote on Wed, 31 Aug 2022 > at 16:38:11 EDT in <Yw/Gsxp7e5MCh3US@louder-room.local>: > > > I suppose I should send some 2,000-character paragraph emails as > > tests to see what happens, but I very much doubt there will be > > problems as a result. > > Anyhow, if I send a 2,000-character line in mutt, it encodes it in > quoted-printable. So no standards problem.
This is precisely what's concerning--you seem to think that this covers all the reasons why the standard exists, and the convention persists. That's the farthest thing from true. Mutt is not the ony thing that sends mail, and you have no idea what's happening in all the myriad of other things that do; nor do you on the receiving end or on any of the recipients, which may include custom tools that are thwarted by your refusal to adhere to the established convention. To be clear, I have no issue with YOU not wrapping your lines in mail you send with Mutt--after this thread ends I will just happily ignore your messages, since I find them annoying to deal with. It's the fact that you're actively advocating ignoring the standards as a general practice, possibly to the detriment of those who may be using e-mail differently than you are, who might be negatively impacted by doing so, or their recipients, as a result. That I find completely unacceptable. > Can we please move back to...I don't even know. Other suggestions on > ways to handle the problem of devices that don't display > hard-wrapped text well? There are no such devices, except those which are too small to display e-mail readably in the first place, so not worth considering. Beyond that there are only ones which some users may stubbornly refuse to use effectively. But in any case, no! Or to be more precise, you can discuss them all you like, but they won't happen, just as format=flowed has already failed (which TBH I find unfortunate). All you could possibly succeed in doing is to convince a few more people to send messages that are annoyingly hard to read in text-based clients, and risk transmission failure when they attempt to do so outside the extremely well-behaved confines of Mutt. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
