On 15Sep2015 14:07, Ian Zimmerman <i...@buug.org> wrote:
On 2015-09-07 21:50 -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > set wrap=78
> > set smart_wrap
> > set reflow_wrap
[...]
ps: your posts still do not observe <78 chars. Please set wrap
Re-reading this thread again (with a copy of the manual on the side),
I'm lost.
The way I read the manual all these settings only matter when displaying
a message that has been received; the message itself is never changed by
them.
That is correct.
So, why and how would it matter if _Grady_ set his *wrap* variables?
Isn't that something for Patrick to do, if Patrick wants Grady's message
to display in a particular way? The only way I can see Grady can
influence the appearance of his _outgoing_ messages is with text_flowed,
and then with his editor.
There is an issue in that Grady does need to end his long lines (== paragraph)
with a space, or fold them with trailing spaces; otherwise his lines render as
"fixed" in the format=flowed regime, which causes them to _not_ be folded for
display.
The other side of the coin is that that spec _recommends_ folding at <78 in the
composition phase in order than a user whose mail reader doesn't understand
format=flowed can still see somewhat well laid out text.
To take an example, I'm writing this message in format=flowed but folding my
lines at <78 (with trailing spaces to indicate reflowable text). The display
_should_ be nicely flowed to match the reader's reflow settings. But if you
pipe the raw message data through less you should at least see text folded
before 78 chars, which accomodates simple message inspection or incompetent
mail reader software.
Cheers,
Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au>
