[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       9fans
Subject:    Re: [9fans] Is there a list for Limbo/Inferno discussion?
From:       Theo Honohan <theoh () chiark ! greenend ! org ! uk>
Date:       2000-09-29 11:08:33
Message-ID: E13ey1p-0005O3-00 () chiark ! greenend ! org ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]

In message <20000927110947.R26209@cackle.proxima.alt.za>, Lucio De Re writes:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 08:53:30AM +0000, forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk wrote:
> > 
> > i was originally hoping to stick to usenet for open inferno/limbo
> > discussion, because

[...]

> 
> PS: Your lines have crawled back to beyond my margins :-)
> 

I've been wondering whether some level of support for RFC 2646
"format=flowed" would be an appropriate addition to acme Mail.

Living among the fallen, I'm used to emacs's various adaptive and
automatic filling modes.  I often end up using them (interactively) to
achieve the same wrapping effect as "format=flowed" in quoted text.
It's not really very satisfactory -- it's too easy to mangle the text.

"Format=flowed" seems to offer the possibility of safely automating
the bulk of this work, and it's becoming quite widely supported.  I
would be interested to hear good or bad opinions about it from people
on the list.

(I suppose an alternative, in the UTF-8 mail world, would be to use
Unicode "line separator" as a soft line break.  Unless you also put in
a CRLF at the end of each "line", though, you would run into problems
with the SMTP line length limit (and non-Unicode readers would get
even worse formatting.))


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]