Kurt Hackenberg <k...@panix.com> wrote on Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 17:22:48 EDT in <2d716370-8c96-adcf-11d4-939a3f808...@panix.com>:
> > I don't really think we're flouting the standards. > > Very long lines -- one line per paragraph -- changes the meaning of > ASCII/Unicode. err, what? I am confused what we are discussing. > I could live with that if it were labelled, with a new MIME subtype, but I > agree that a new subtype probably And even more so here. 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. 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? I mean, at the moment, the choices are: (a) hard-wrap the lines (b) don't wrap the lines at all (my preference) (c) format=flowed, which works approximately nowhere that (a) doesn't It's a good thing no one is proposing a different set of defaults for mutt. Oh maybe we're discussing how to accomplish these things in vim or Emacs? I dunno, again. -- jh...@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson
