On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 08:51:57PM +0000, Tony's unattended mail wrote: > > Only if the user writes them that way. I receive a lot of flowed > > e-mail at work from certain people, and most of them do not insert > > the extra line feed. And what if your formatted text (say, code) > > has extra linefeeds? > > > > It's not enough dude. Nice try though. > > Again, this is another straw man. What I am suggesting is not the > format=flowed standard. It's a hypothetical hybrid.
It's not a straw man, because format=flowed is functionally identical to what you're suggesting in every way, except that you are imposing an ADDITIONAL constraint that a specified number of line feeds MEANS something. THIS CAN NOT WORK. I've already explained why. > Saying that people will violate a standard of any kind isn't good > enough because any standard can be abused. The difference here is that the violation will be NECESSARILY commonplace, rendering your standard useless. There are many reasons to want extra blank lines in formatted text. There are people who don't want blank lines in their e-mail. You CAN NOT distinguish between the four possible cases, and you therefore CAN NOT define a format based on that information. -- 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.
pgpmdZpkh588s.pgp
Description: PGP signature
