If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
Hello all,
My newsgroup client, OE, still has an auto-wrap line width set to 76 chars, and I wondering if it is still called for. Are there still people who still use a 80-char wide console screen using a client which cannot or doesn't wrap lines itself ? In short, is there still a reason to follow this decades old default (or is it just a case of following it for its own sake) ? Remark: While my OE still sends messages auto-wrapped*, it seems to have no problem with displaying messages that use much longer lines. *forcing me to reformat stuf that I quote - just because a single "" is prepended. Regards, Rudy Wieser |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
On Sun, 1 Sep 2019 09:17:43 +0200, "R.Wieser"
wrote: Hello all, My newsgroup client, OE, still has an auto-wrap line width set to 76 chars, and I wondering if it is still called for. Are there still people who still use a 80-char wide console screen using a client which cannot or doesn't wrap lines itself ? In short, is there still a reason to follow this decades old default (or is it just a case of following it for its own sake) ? Remark: While my OE still sends messages auto-wrapped*, it seems to have no problem with displaying messages that use much longer lines. *forcing me to reformat stuf that I quote - just because a single "" is prepended. Regards, Rudy Wieser My Forte Agent defaults to 70 chars when posting. I have to hit "o" to see any really long lines in received messages because it does not wrap by default. HTH []'s -- Don't be evil - Google 2004 We have a new policy - Google 2012 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do Ineed to ?
R.Wieser wrote:
While my OE still sends messages auto-wrapped*, it seems to have no problem with displaying messages that use much longer lines. *forcing me to reformat stuf that I quote - just because a single "" is prepended. Important to this discussion is the fact that your OE msg is f=f; format=flowed. That means your wraps are 'soft' as opposed to hard. X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original However, since the information appears in an X-line, my agent doesn't treat it the same as if it were in a Content-type line, which is the way my agent does it. When I used OE, I found OE Quote-Fix by Dominik Jain to be invaluable. Those old links are dead. -- Mike Easter |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
Mike,
Important to this discussion is the fact that your OE msg is f=f; format=flowed. While /composing/ the message ? Sure. But when the message is /send/ those lines are broken up to be no longer than that 76 char limit. To be honest, I have no idea why the OE people did not make composing window show what the message would look like when its posted (in short: WYSIWYG) - including obeying the "send as plain text" setting - I still can put all kinds of text formatting (size, color, etc) into the composition window (which disappear on sending, and /only/ than). :-( When I used OE, I found OE Quote-Fix by Dominik Jain to be invaluable. I've heard about it, but if there is no need to hard-wrap such quote-fixing* isn't really needed. *as quote prefixes can differer between clients - and possibly not recognised by a program - I will stil need to double check. And as I'm as lazy as they come ... :-) But ... the question is: Do I (still) need to hard-wrap long lines on sending ? Or may I expect that most modern-ish readers* will (be able to) do such wrapping themselves ? *As, or more recent than OE6 on XP I mean. Regards, Rudy Wieser |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76.Do I need to ?
R.Wieser wrote:
Hello all, My newsgroup client, OE, still has an auto-wrap line width set to 76 chars, and I wondering if it is still called for. Are there still people who still use a 80-char wide console screen using a client which cannot or doesn't wrap lines itself ? In short, is there still a reason to follow this decades old default (or is it just a case of following it for its own sake) ? Remark: While my OE still sends messages auto-wrapped*, it seems to have no problem with displaying messages that use much longer lines. *forcing me to reformat stuf that I quote - just because a single "" is prepended. Regards, Rudy Wieser Your current server (AIOE) also enforces a line length. Might be 150 characters or so. This may have been intended as a solution for people in a certain kook group from doing "cascades". (The kook group has had other limits applied to it as well.) As for format="Flowed", there is a FAQ of sorts. https://joeclark.org/ffaq.html USENET protocols enforce a line length limit of ~1000 characters for headers, so I expect the Body text has that limit as well. This means it is in the best interest of the Client program, to adhere to whatever that limit is. If you can't set the client to over ~1000, that might be the reason. Using alt.test on AIOE, you should be able to dial in what the limit is today. As the administrator is rather flexible on the topic (bumped from 135 to 150 when asked to do so). But he is unlikely to remove the limit entirely. As it's AIOE, "have fun" applies. Paul |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
Paul,
Your current server (AIOE) also enforces a line length. To be honest, I didn't expect that. Does sound like a smart thing to do though. USENET protocols enforce a line length limit of ~1000 At some point that came to my mind too. If I drop the 76 char limit I will, assuming I just keep writing paragraphs that end with a CRLF, run into that one, which effectivily means nothing changes. And if that doesn't create a problem, anyone who quotes such a wide paragraph (mine or someone elses) will bring me back to square one ... I had hoped I could just alow quotes parts to shift a bit to the right (because of new quote prefixes) and not having to reformat them (manual or otherwise). Drats. I didn't really think this thru, didn't I ? :-( :-) Regards, Rudy Wieser |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do Ineed to ?
On 2019-9-2 2:28, R.Wieser wrote:
Paul, Your current server (AIOE) also enforces a line length. To be honest, I didn't expect that. Does sound like a smart thing to do though. USENET protocols enforce a line length limit of ~1000 At some point that came to my mind too. If I drop the 76 char limit I will, assuming I just keep writing paragraphs that end with a CRLF, run into that one, which effectivily means nothing changes. And if that doesn't create a problem, anyone who quotes such a wide paragraph (mine or someone elses) will bring me back to square one ... I had hoped I could just alow quotes parts to shift a bit to the right (because of new quote prefixes) and not having to reformat them (manual or otherwise). Drats. I didn't really think this thru, didn't I ? :-( :-) Regards, Rudy Wieser If you would like to try, Thunderbird has a feature of "rewrap" quotes, which mostly does its work. My transition from OE to TB is quite smooth. It was long time ago, though. -- Regards, Lu Wei IM: PGP: 0xA12FEF7592CCE1EA |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
In message , R.Wieser
writes: Hello all, My newsgroup client, OE, still has an auto-wrap line width set to 76 chars, and I wondering if it is still called for. Are there still people who still use a 80-char wide console screen using a client which cannot or doesn't wrap lines itself ? I doubt there are many (any?) still using a fixed-width screen. I don't see that - or the fact that the convention is just old - as a reason to drop it, though. (After all, you're still using OE!) In short, is there still a reason to follow this decades old default (or is it just a case of following it for its own sake) ? Remark: While my OE still sends messages auto-wrapped*, it seems to have no problem with displaying messages that use much longer lines. My client (Turnpike, 2007) has no problem with displaying (i. e. rewrapping) _most_ posts. _Some_ do require me to scroll horizontally, or take other action, to read long lines; oddly, they're often (possibly always) posts containing posted text, where I can read that text in the original post no problem. *forcing me to reformat stuf that I quote - just because a single "" is prepended. (I don't usually bother to do that.) Regards, Rudy Wieser JPG -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf She didn't strike me as much of a reader. It's never a good sign if someone has a leaflet with a bookmark in it. - Sarah Millican in Rdio Times, 17-23 November 2012 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
In message , R.Wieser
writes: Mike, [] When I used OE, I found OE Quote-Fix by Dominik Jain to be invaluable. I've heard about it, but if there is no need to hard-wrap such quote-fixing* isn't really needed. OE had (has!) other benefits - IMO mainly help with avoiding top-posting. *as quote prefixes can differer between clients - and possibly not recognised by a program - I will stil need to double check. And as I'm as lazy as they come ... :-) (-: But ... the question is: Do I (still) need to hard-wrap long lines on sending ? Or may I expect that most modern-ish readers* will (be able to) do such wrapping themselves ? *As, or more recent than OE6 on XP I mean. You probably don't _need_ to, but - especially since even OE _can_ do it automatically - I can't see the _harm_ in leaving it on. Regards, Rudy Wieser JPG -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf She didn't strike me as much of a reader. It's never a good sign if someone has a leaflet with a bookmark in it. - Sarah Millican in Rdio Times, 17-23 November 2012 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
Lu wei,
If you would like to try, Thunderbird has a feature of "rewrap" quotes, which mostly does its work. I will probably try OE Quote-Fix first. But it will certainly not hurt to take a peek at what Thunderbird could mean for me. Thanks. Regards, Rudy Wieser |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
John,
I doubt there are many (any?) still using a fixed-width screen. I don't see that - or the fact that the convention is just old - as a reason to drop it, though. (After all, you're still using OE!) :-) I was thinking that OE was just behaving in a backward compatible fashion, and it already had mechanisms in place to do it the "modern" way (auto reflow). My client (Turnpike, 2007) has no problem with displaying ( i. e. rewrapping) _most_ posts. OE has got its own problems in that regard. When replying it sometimes doesn't add quote prefixes to the origional messages lines. :-\ OE had (has!) other benefits - IMO mainly help with avoiding top-posting. It does ? Can't say I've ever noticed that. I always start my message composing at the top, pushing the origional message down (so I can both easily grab quotes from it and re-check the context of what I'm replying to). Up until recently I even left the origional message, marked as such, at the bottom as a kind of attachment (as reference material). You probably don't _need_ to, but - especially since even OE _can_ do it automatically - I can't see the _harm_ in leaving it on. I take it you are referring to that OE Quote-fix program. I currently have no idea if, and how well it does its job. But if that works as advertised there is no reason to want the hard wrapping off (and there are e few other reasons to keep it on too ...). Maybe I should just try it (I just hope its as easily removable as installable ...). Regards, Rudy Wieser |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Max line width for newsgroup messages. Still have it at 76. Do I need to ?
In message , R.Wieser
writes: John, [] OE had (has!) other benefits - IMO mainly help with avoiding top-posting. It does ? Can't say I've ever noticed that. I always start my message Oops, I meant OE-quotefix. OE most definitely _encourages_ top-posting, on its own. composing at the top, pushing the origional message down (so I can both easily grab quotes from it and re-check the context of what I'm replying to). Up until recently I even left the origional message, marked as such, at the bottom as a kind of attachment (as reference material). I think the original idea was it put the cursor at the top of the quoted post, but for people to then step through the original, deleting bits they weren't responding to and adding their bits below each section. People didn't do that though. And it was especially made worse by OE putting the (new) .sig at the top too )-:. That - among other things - is what OE-QuoteFix fixes. You probably don't _need_ to, but - especially since even OE _can_ do it automatically - I can't see the _harm_ in leaving it on. I take it you are referring to that OE Quote-fix program. I currently have no idea if, and how well it does its job. But if that works as advertised there is no reason to want the hard wrapping off (and there are e few other reasons to keep it on too ...). Maybe I should just try it (I just hope its as easily removable as installable ...). Yes. IIRR it works in a slightly unusual way. IIRR, it generates a separate desktop shortcut - something like OE-with-quotefix - but I could be wrong about that, it's been a while! (I used to use its brother, Outlook-Quotefix, at work, until they switched to a version of O that was incompatible with it [2003 or 2007, I forget].) Regards, Rudy Wieser John -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "OLTION'S COMPLETE, UNABRIDGED HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE Bang! ...crumple." - Jery Oltion |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|