Re: maximum size of e-mails to sundial list including attachments
I would welcome a limit of 1MB. Thibaud At 22:50 30-9-2019, Daniel Roth wrote: Dear members of the sundial mailing list! As I'm seeing more often that e-mails to the sundial mailing list are being blocked because of the size of the attachments I would like to remind you that there is a limitation of the accepted size of messages to the list, which is 290 kB. We agreed on this size several years ago, because bandwidth for many of us was low. Nowadays this might not be the case anymore for most of us. Attached images to an e-mail might be very helpful and informative. However, resizing down the images is sometimes difficult with the mentioned limitation. Please let me know your thoughts about this, whether we shall increase the limit now to e.g. 1 MB. Thank you all for your valuable contributions to this list, which I founded back in 1996! Best regards Daniel Roth, sundial mailing list --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial -- Th. Taudin Chabot, . tcha...@dds.nl --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
Re: maximum size of e-mails to sundial list including attachments
Dear Daniel, Thank you for your message and thank you for continuing to provide such an excellent service. You are an unseen hero of the sundialling community! I have no strong views on whether 290kB is the 'right' limit and I shall read what others have to say. BUT... Please could you update the advice given in: https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial Here it still says that the limit is 50kB and that is definitely too small! Very best wishes Frank Frank King Cambridge, U.K. --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
maximum size of e-mails to sundial list including attachments
Dear members of the sundial mailing list! As I'm seeing more often that e-mails to the sundial mailing list are being blocked because of the size of the attachments I would like to remind you that there is a limitation of the accepted size of messages to the list, which is 290 kB. We agreed on this size several years ago, because bandwidth for many of us was low. Nowadays this might not be the case anymore for most of us. Attached images to an e-mail might be very helpful and informative. However, resizing down the images is sometimes difficult with the mentioned limitation. Please let me know your thoughts about this, whether we shall increase the limit now to e.g. 1 MB. Thank you all for your valuable contributions to this list, which I founded back in 1996! Best regards Daniel Roth, sundial mailing list --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
Re: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments
It's just that the time was ripe for the creation of a Facebook group. If I hadn't created it, someone else would have surely, sooner or later. I'm also no real friend of the Facebook system as especially young persons tend to publish stuff they shouldn't. There is no need here for anyone to switch to Facebook. By the way, we have set the limit for the size of attachments to 50 kB several years ago. I had asked sometimes, whether we shall have it raised to a higher value or not. The last time I asked there were still members in this group, who connect via low band width to their e-mail servers. May be that this has changed. What would you say you can live with as the maximum size for attachments? I oftenly get rejected e-mails of subscribers of this list, who tried to send a photo to the list. This is surely a problem as further discussion then are not continued on the list. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list - Original Message - From: maill...@virginbroadband.com.au To: john.pick...@bigpond.com, r...@infraroth.de, sundial@uni-koeln.de Date: 29.07.2011 08:54:47 Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Thank all who have answered my question about Facebook. Looks like Facebook hasn't changed is still what I thought it was. It would be a pity if traffic from this groups ends up on Facebook. Maybe we would be better off just having this group instead of splitting it up with Facebook. Thanks all for your information on Facebook. Roderick Wall. -Original Message- From: John Pickard Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 3:45 PM To: r...@infraroth.de ; sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Hello Daniel, I was hoping this was the case, and you have reassured me. Thank you. I would be reluctant to quit this list as it is really so helpful. The recent emails on stone cutting demonstrate this. Cheers, John John Pickard john.pick...@bigpond.com - Original Message - From: r...@infraroth.de To: john.pick...@bigpond.com; sundial@uni-koeln.de Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 10:11 PM Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Hello all, just to clarify: No one was added automatically to any Facebook group. If someone has an interest in the Facebook group Gnomonica he or she actively has to call from within Facebook to be added to that group. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3779 - Release Date: 07/21/11 Internal Virus Database is out of date. --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
Re: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments
Well, we'll just have to make sure we only ask questions and send sundial information via this group. That way we'll keep this group as to where the action is for SUNDIALS. We don't need Facebook. Don't know if Facebook has a front page or what. But Daniel could put a message there to say that the action is on this group as that is where everyone is. Have fun in the sun, Roderick Wall -Original Message- From: r...@infraroth.de Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 6:57 PM To: maill...@virginbroadband.com.au ; john.pick...@bigpond.com ; sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments It's just that the time was ripe for the creation of a Facebook group. If I hadn't created it, someone else would have surely, sooner or later. I'm also no real friend of the Facebook system as especially young persons tend to publish stuff they shouldn't. There is no need here for anyone to switch to Facebook. By the way, we have set the limit for the size of attachments to 50 kB several years ago. I had asked sometimes, whether we shall have it raised to a higher value or not. The last time I asked there were still members in this group, who connect via low band width to their e-mail servers. May be that this has changed. What would you say you can live with as the maximum size for attachments? I oftenly get rejected e-mails of subscribers of this list, who tried to send a photo to the list. This is surely a problem as further discussion then are not continued on the list. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list - Original Message - From: maill...@virginbroadband.com.au To: john.pick...@bigpond.com, r...@infraroth.de, sundial@uni-koeln.de Date: 29.07.2011 08:54:47 Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Thank all who have answered my question about Facebook. Looks like Facebook hasn't changed is still what I thought it was. It would be a pity if traffic from this groups ends up on Facebook. Maybe we would be better off just having this group instead of splitting it up with Facebook. Thanks all for your information on Facebook. Roderick Wall. -Original Message- From: John Pickard Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 3:45 PM To: r...@infraroth.de ; sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Hello Daniel, I was hoping this was the case, and you have reassured me. Thank you. I would be reluctant to quit this list as it is really so helpful. The recent emails on stone cutting demonstrate this. Cheers, John John Pickard john.pick...@bigpond.com - Original Message - From: r...@infraroth.de To: john.pick...@bigpond.com; sundial@uni-koeln.de Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 10:11 PM Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Hello all, just to clarify: No one was added automatically to any Facebook group. If someone has an interest in the Facebook group Gnomonica he or she actively has to call from within Facebook to be added to that group. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3779 - Release Date: 07/21/11 Internal Virus Database is out of date. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3779 - Release Date: 07/21/11 Internal Virus Database is out of date. --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
RE Size of attachments (Was: facebook, anyone? )
A thought on the size of attachments: I use MS Office Picture Manager for quick and easy/simple photo editing and it allows me to compress images. All who use Windows also have this program as far as I know. Running a test (as I was compressing images for work anyway show: A 3.1 MB original can be redused to a 541 KB image (said to be for documents) whithout loosing too many details 103 KB image (internet) with a reduction of detail, but not too bad 13.3 KB image (e-mail) which reduces the level of details too much for my liking and not good enough for sharing images of sundials. A limit of 6-700kB will alow for photos showing enough details to get see what a sundial looks like. Best AnneB Tromsø, Norway -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de [mailto:sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de] På vegne av r...@infraroth.de Sendt: 29. juli 2011 10:58 Til: maill...@virginbroadband.com.au; john.pick...@bigpond.com; sundial@uni-koeln.de Emne: Re: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments It's just that the time was ripe for the creation of a Facebook group. If I hadn't created it, someone else would have surely, sooner or later. I'm also no real friend of the Facebook system as especially young persons tend to publish stuff they shouldn't. There is no need here for anyone to switch to Facebook. By the way, we have set the limit for the size of attachments to 50 kB several years ago. I had asked sometimes, whether we shall have it raised to a higher value or not. The last time I asked there were still members in this group, who connect via low band width to their e-mail servers. May be that this has changed. What would you say you can live with as the maximum size for attachments? I oftenly get rejected e-mails of subscribers of this list, who tried to send a photo to the list. This is surely a problem as further discussion then are not continued on the list. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list -- --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
RE: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments
Hi Daniel: If some people still have dial up modems, you'll probably have to keep an attachment size limit. But 50 KBs is pretty small- even for dial up. Maybe you could increase the limit to 250 KB? And if somebody wants to share more KBs of photos, they can do it FOR FREE at Flickr.com John C. -Original Message- From: sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de [mailto:sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de] On Behalf Of r...@infraroth.de Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 1:58 AM To: maill...@virginbroadband.com.au; john.pick...@bigpond.com; sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments It's just that the time was ripe for the creation of a Facebook group. If I hadn't created it, someone else would have surely, sooner or later. I'm also no real friend of the Facebook system as especially young persons tend to publish stuff they shouldn't. There is no need here for anyone to switch to Facebook. By the way, we have set the limit for the size of attachments to 50 kB several years ago. I had asked sometimes, whether we shall have it raised to a higher value or not. The last time I asked there were still members in this group, who connect via low band width to their e-mail servers. May be that this has changed. What would you say you can live with as the maximum size for attachments? I oftenly get rejected e-mails of subscribers of this list, who tried to send a photo to the list. This is surely a problem as further discussion then are not continued on the list. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list - Original Message - From: maill...@virginbroadband.com.au To: john.pick...@bigpond.com, r...@infraroth.de, sundial@uni-koeln.de Date: 29.07.2011 08:54:47 Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Thank all who have answered my question about Facebook. Looks like Facebook hasn't changed is still what I thought it was. It would be a pity if traffic from this groups ends up on Facebook. Maybe we would be better off just having this group instead of splitting it up with Facebook. Thanks all for your information on Facebook. Roderick Wall. -Original Message- From: John Pickard Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 3:45 PM To: r...@infraroth.de ; sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Hello Daniel, I was hoping this was the case, and you have reassured me. Thank you. I would be reluctant to quit this list as it is really so helpful. The recent emails on stone cutting demonstrate this. Cheers, John John Pickard john.pick...@bigpond.com - Original Message - From: r...@infraroth.de To: john.pick...@bigpond.com; sundial@uni-koeln.de Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 10:11 PM Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Hello all, just to clarify: No one was added automatically to any Facebook group. If someone has an interest in the Facebook group Gnomonica he or she actively has to call from within Facebook to be added to that group. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3779 - Release Date: 07/21/11 Internal Virus Database is out of date. --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
RE: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments
Well, my thoughts for the facebook group would be to find new members. Lots of folks are on facebook and might find us there. It also allows us a place to post pics of our work so we can share our dials without having to change the way the list works. Karon Adams Accredited Jewelry Professional (GIA) You can send a free Rosary to a soldier! www.facebook.com/MilitaryRosary www.YellowRibbonRosaries.com -Original Message- From: sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de [mailto:sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de] On Behalf Of R Wall Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 5:22 AM To: r...@infraroth.de; john.pick...@bigpond.com; sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments Well, we'll just have to make sure we only ask questions and send sundial information via this group. That way we'll keep this group as to where the action is for SUNDIALS. We don't need Facebook. Don't know if Facebook has a front page or what. But Daniel could put a message there to say that the action is on this group as that is where everyone is. Have fun in the sun, Roderick Wall -Original Message- From: r...@infraroth.de Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 6:57 PM To: maill...@virginbroadband.com.au ; john.pick...@bigpond.com ; sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? / size of attachments It's just that the time was ripe for the creation of a Facebook group. If I hadn't created it, someone else would have surely, sooner or later. I'm also no real friend of the Facebook system as especially young persons tend to publish stuff they shouldn't. There is no need here for anyone to switch to Facebook. By the way, we have set the limit for the size of attachments to 50 kB several years ago. I had asked sometimes, whether we shall have it raised to a higher value or not. The last time I asked there were still members in this group, who connect via low band width to their e-mail servers. May be that this has changed. What would you say you can live with as the maximum size for attachments? I oftenly get rejected e-mails of subscribers of this list, who tried to send a photo to the list. This is surely a problem as further discussion then are not continued on the list. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list - Original Message - From: maill...@virginbroadband.com.au To: john.pick...@bigpond.com, r...@infraroth.de, sundial@uni-koeln.de Date: 29.07.2011 08:54:47 Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Thank all who have answered my question about Facebook. Looks like Facebook hasn't changed is still what I thought it was. It would be a pity if traffic from this groups ends up on Facebook. Maybe we would be better off just having this group instead of splitting it up with Facebook. Thanks all for your information on Facebook. Roderick Wall. -Original Message- From: John Pickard Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 3:45 PM To: r...@infraroth.de ; sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Hello Daniel, I was hoping this was the case, and you have reassured me. Thank you. I would be reluctant to quit this list as it is really so helpful. The recent emails on stone cutting demonstrate this. Cheers, John John Pickard john.pick...@bigpond.com - Original Message - From: r...@infraroth.de To: john.pick...@bigpond.com; sundial@uni-koeln.de Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 10:11 PM Subject: Re: facebook, anyone? Hello all, just to clarify: No one was added automatically to any Facebook group. If someone has an interest in the Facebook group Gnomonica he or she actively has to call from within Facebook to be added to that group. Best regards - - Daniel, sundial mailing list --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3779 - Release Date: 07/21/11 Internal Virus Database is out of date. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3779 - Release Date: 07/21/11 Internal Virus Database is out of date. --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
Re: Large Attachments
Hi! Sorry, for having accepted these large attachments accidentally! The maximum size for a contribution to the sundial mailing list is still set to 50 kB. Thanks to the list members, who contribute illustrative pictures along with the text! Sometimes I see images, which were compiled inadequately or saved in an inappropriate file format. To those who like to send an image to the list, try to figure out the differences between JPG and GIF/PNG if you aren't familiar with these in detail yet (use JPG for photos or photo-like images and use GIF or PNG for drawings and other images with spacious single-colored areas and lines with an overall limited number of colors). One may also consider uploading the image to a web server and just giving the link to this image. Best regards - - Daniel Roth, sundial mailing list --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
Large Attachments
PLEASE, no attachments on Sundial. We don't all have broadband connections. Yesterday's 'bundle' took me nearly half an hour to download and blocked my incoming emails for earlier in the day. Mike Cowham Cambridge --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
Re: Large Attachments
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Cowham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PLEASE, no attachments on Sundial. We don't all have broadband connections. Yesterday's 'bundle' took me nearly half an hour to download and blocked my incoming emails for earlier in the day. Mike Cowham Cambridge I can certainly understand Mike's comments, since I am also using 'Dial-up' (not Broadband) - and it took a while to down-load all the pictures, plus avi file, which were posted by Phil Walker. Although I would not put a 'blanket-ban' on ALL attachments, I do think that there should be some upper limit (for each individual message) - of say 10 Kbytes, which covers text plus attachments. That should allow any reasonable size GIF diagrams, and probably small 'thumbnail' JPEG photographs - as aids to the E-mail text. However, this is only workable if the system at uni-koeln could establish the size of a message - and 'reject' any over-size ones. I assume this is technically possible, for the E-mail 'experts'. Otherwise, could I please ask that members of this list simply include a 'link' to an appropriate website address - where any large files can be down-loaded, if a person chooses to do this. Mrs Linda Reid - (normally just a 'lurker' on this list)! -- --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
RE: Large Attachments : Verboten
The filters were set at ~25 kb. I don't know what happened to let the larger files through. I have often added the odd sketch or picture under 25 kb as an attachment. These contribute to the discussion. Sometimes the total message is larger and it bounces. This discipline is good. Let's keep the filters at that level as often a picture is worth a thousand words (25 kb). Regards, Roger Bailey -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Linda Reid Sent: July 13, 2006 3:13 PM To: sundial@uni-koeln.de Subject: Re: Large Attachments In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Cowham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PLEASE, no attachments on Sundial. We don't all have broadband connections. Yesterday's 'bundle' took me nearly half an hour to download and blocked my incoming emails for earlier in the day. Mike Cowham Cambridge I can certainly understand Mike's comments, since I am also using 'Dial-up' (not Broadband) - and it took a while to down-load all the pictures, plus avi file, which were posted by Phil Walker. Although I would not put a 'blanket-ban' on ALL attachments, I do think that there should be some upper limit (for each individual message) - of say 10 Kbytes, which covers text plus attachments. That should allow any reasonable size GIF diagrams, and probably small 'thumbnail' JPEG photographs - as aids to the E-mail text. However, this is only workable if the system at uni-koeln could establish the size of a message - and 'reject' any over-size ones. I assume this is technically possible, for the E-mail 'experts'. Otherwise, could I please ask that members of this list simply include a 'link' to an appropriate website address - where any large files can be down-loaded, if a person chooses to do this. Mrs Linda Reid - (normally just a 'lurker' on this list)! -- --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
Re: accuracy attachments
Hi Walter, I too thought some small pictures were nice, but, as I have a few websites I can post items to, I'll do that in the future, so that those that want to see the pics can, those that don't, wont. I'm hoping the adobe Acrobat pdf format I've chosen will work for everyone, since readers are free for most platforms. On the accuracy thing I have a few comments. For me, time as characterized by the orbiting and rotating of the earth as complicated by height, refraction, elliptical orbits, perturbations and lovely earthly wobbles is the real time. I mean, we live with it every day and the sun being up makes it day. Again, this beloved time is actually a set of observations of a number of interacting processes which are not forever repetitive to the finest structure. Anyhow, at an observatory I once visited they commonly reflected and enlarged the image of the sun to about 6 feet (2 meters) in diameter on a large, long blank white wall with a fine grid and took timed photos of it as it as it moved rapidly across the wall. They said they could resolve time to hundredths of seconds with this method. Using a sextant and accurate tables, fixing on just an upper or lower limb of the sun, accuracies of better than a second in time are often made if the position in space is very accurately known. The key to accuracy appears to be in enlarging the image and using either a predetermined elliptical shape to measure it's position, or some fixed point on the edge of the image, or a grid and photos. An idea to make smaller time intervals more meaningful is to know that light travels about a foot (11.8 inches) in a nanosecond. So the difference in time between the path of light at dawn and noon, being different by about 4 thousand miles is about 0.02 seconds. I like the spirit and message of your comments! Edley McKnight [43.126N 123.327W] Hello again, thank you for all for the reactions, but what is wrong with my feeling about a second, when I say you can feel it , I mean of course you can count in seconds not in milli- or nano- seconds. I had thought about the sharpness of the shadow, but forgotten to mention it. Considering the center of a shadow of a thick gnomon I do not like, it is to subjective - your eyesight angle of view may be different as to another person. But what about the reverse, instead of a shadow use the light. This was used by clockmakers of the past for adjustment of their watches. They used a horizontal dial the gnomon was a small disc with a pierced small hole positioned according the local latitude looked only at noon to the spot thrown on the dial. (as you maybe discovered my interest in sundials is in relation with mechanical clocks or watches). So, why not with the aid of modern optics, obtain this needelpoint of light, the sun is needed in either case, shadow or light;Again, very interested in your comments. ( and also, as said, a university for this study would be nice, no?) Now on attachments, I am a bit surprised by the comments I read, what is prohibitive about pictures ? If it is the price of the connection-time, my opinion is, forget your PC use the conventional method offered by the postal services, you will spend money in either case as you know, the speed is uncompatible between the two. I started with a 56K modem, after that idsn, now I have ADSL, fast indifferent to your connection time which may be 24/on 24, the price remains the same, in my country all providers are constantly lowering their prices. As to the danger of a virus enclosed in an attachment, you have to live with it trust the anti-virus programs, which you have to update often. I personally like pictures in a mail as insertions, use the insertion facility often for drawings taken by my digital camera. So long, Walter 50.42.1 north4.33.46 east
Attachments, Pictures
Dear Membership, Pardon if this is a repeat. My mail has had a couple of hiccups. Yes, I will send no attachments. Yes, I'll post pictorial or lengthy content on one of my websites for a while, or send it directly to those requesting it without copying the info to the list. Bear in mind that I may keep the data/pictures myself for only a very limited time. Yes, I do start some conversations on my own, hoping to learn things from others more experienced than myself, or to pass on something I believe may be of interest to the membership. Yes, I do appreciate hearing from any or all of you that wish to write to me. If others have no site to post their pictures on, If you send them to me as attachments and ask me to post them on one of my sites I will do so and send you an email of where they are at. I can only keep large files, unconnected to my main files, onsite for a few days though. My chosen email program, Pegasus, under File, selective mail download, lets you download just the headers then choose which files to download and which to erase from your ISP. It has saved me the time and expense of large files since I too have a dial up account. Thank all of you for your patience and help! Edley McKnight [43.126N 123.327W]
Re: attachments
those attachments anyhow. Thibaud Chabot At 16:25 19-12-2001 -0500, you wrote: I think attachments (less than 200K) are fine. The recipient can make the choice whether to download them or not. This is a useful way to share ideas. Bill Gottesman - Th. Taudin Chabot, home email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accuracy - Attachments
Hi Walter, It is not possible to increase the dimension of a sundial to increase the precision of the reading and to reach the possibility to read intervals of time very small. The reason is in the diameter of the Sun, because of which when the style goes away from the (horizontal) plane its shadow becomes more and more fuzzy and uncertain (penumbra) One can find easily that in a horizontal sundial for the latitude of 45 d., at noon, in the equinoxes, the width of the shadow of an infinitely thin style, is equal about to the movement of the same shadow in 1 minute (without optical systems) For hours different from noon, the distance between the extremity of the stylus and the shadow increases, provoking an increase of the dimension of the shadow itself. It is this the reason that prevents the construction of sundials with a precisions superior to around 1 m. With some artifices (shaped holes, shadow sharpeners, etc.) we can reach also a better precision ( maximum 10-20 sec) +++ For the problem of the attachments I agree completely with Mac Oglesby Often it is necessary to show an image or a sketch and we cannot wait, before showing it, to put it in a web site (moreover not all have an URL ! ) and, after to write to the list. If I don't mistake, a message longer then 20 or 24 kb is rejected by the Majordomo: this rule of the 20-24 kb must then be accepted by everybody, also from those people that don't have interest for these attachments. Gianni Ferrari Lat.44o 39' N Long. 10o 55' E
accuracy attachments
Hello again, thank you for all for the reactions, but what is wrong with my feeling about a second, when I say you can feel it , I mean of course you can count in seconds not in milli- or nano- seconds. I had thought about the sharpness of the shadow, but forgotten to mention it. Considering the center of a shadow of a thick gnomon I do not like, it is to subjective - your eyesight angle of view may be different as to another person. But what about the reverse, instead of a shadow use the light. This was used by clockmakers of the past for adjustment of their watches. They used a horizontal dial the gnomon was a small disc with a pierced small hole positioned according the local latitude looked only at noon to the spot thrown on the dial. (as you maybe discovered my interest in sundials is in relation with mechanical clocks or watches). So, why not with the aid of modern optics, obtain this needelpoint of light, the sun is needed in either case, shadow or light;Again, very interested in your comments. ( and also, as said, a university for this study would be nice, no?) Now on attachments, I am a bit surprised by the comments I read, what is prohibitive about pictures ? If it is the price of the connection-time, my opinion is, forget your PC use the conventional method offered by the postal services, you will spend money in either case as you know, the speed is uncompatible between the two. I started with a 56K modem, after that idsn, now I have ADSL, fast indifferent to your connection time which may be 24/on 24, the price remains the same, in my country all providers are constantly lowering their prices. As to the danger of a virus enclosed in an attachment, you have to live with it trust the anti-virus programs, which you have to update often. I personally like pictures in a mail as insertions, use the insertion facility often for drawings taken by my digital camera. So long, Walter 50.42.1 north4.33.46 east
Re: attachments
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think attachments (less than 200K) are fine. The recipient can make the choice whether to download them or not. This is a useful way to share ideas. This depends on the e-mail program that one uses. Netscape (which I use) does not allow me to preview the messages at the e-mail server so that I can make a choice which ones to download or not. When Tony Moss sends large files, he first invites (via this list) people who want them to reply personally, and then he sends them the files privately. This has worked well for me. This is good nettetiquette. I suggest that mr. Edley does the same. * Robert H. van Gent * Tel/Fax: 00-31-30-2720269 * * Zaagmolenkade 50 * * * 3515 AE Utrecht* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * The Netherlands* * * Homepage: http://www.phys.uu.nl/~vgent/homepage.htm *
Attachments
Hello List Members, Concerning attachments sent to this mailing list--didn't we endure a lengthy discussion some time back about whether or not attachments should be allowed, and, if so, what should be the maximum size permitted? Forgive me if I misremember, but wasn't it decided that attachments up to a certain size (24k?) were OK? Personally, I think the list members have, in general, made very good decisions about when to send attachments, and I am always happy to receive them. There are times when a picture, or a drawing, is truly worth a thousand words! Best wishes for a happy and healthy holiday season. Mac Oglesby Brattleboro, Vermont USA
virus sent from my email. don't open attachments from me.
A virus on my machine is sending out email with an attachment. please do not open it. The email will probably say: Hi! How are you. I send you this file in order to have your advice See you later. Thanks
DeltaCad e-mail attachments
Hi Steve and others: It looks like the text printing problem of DC drawings will not be easily solved. That's ok. What's really important is that the print shop is able to make good large copies of everything else. It is pretty easy to cut and paste text onto bond paper or use sticky back text on velum or mylar. Also, I can use the tried and true easy method of fotocopy enlargement of a drawing from my own printer. But I really do appreciate all the hard work you and others have done to try to solve the file conversion and text problem. Yesterday I tried to e-mail an attachment of a DeltaCad drawing to a customer without success. First, I tried sending it as a DeltaCad file and then as a dxf. file. (maybe he's not doing it right?) He said that he wasn't able to open either one. Do you know of a way to e-mail DC drawing files to somebody who doesn't have DC? Thanks, John I'm wondering if anyone else on the List has followed your file conversion instructions and then atempted to have prints made and if they got the same results as I did? John, this is exactly the issue I've been asking the list about over the last couple of days. The only difference is that rather than get a paper print from the shop, I used a viewer application which turns the plt file back into a screen image. Today's reply from Ron tells us that we are not going to be able to resolve the DeltaCad/HPGL issue directly. DeltaCad is not exploiting the HPGL method fully/correctly. As I understand it, TIFF is an image compression method, and like all such methods there will almost certainly be some loss of detail in the printouts compared to a vector (line drawing) method such as HPGL. Perhaps that would not matter to you, because the printout is only used as an engraving mask. However, it could be troublesome to convert the drawings to TIFF in the first place. Do you have any graphics packages besides the CAD ones? I have a couple of other ideas: a) Now that you know what type of printer is available at the shop, why not use Ron's method but substituting their actual printer for the HP7585A? The printer driver for OCE 9800 does not come with Windows 98, but you can download it from http://service.oce.com/Drivers/ (in the second box, select Windows Printing Solution). Unfortunately, you have to download 4 files, so it will take quite a while to do it. The Designjet drivers are at http://www.hp.com/cposupport/plotters/software/pl121en.exe.html but since the Designjet seems to be an HPGL printer I don't think the results will be any better than for the 7585A. b) Another way would be to print the drawing using the HPGL method, but instead of putting the labels in the drawing you put in dots or lines which act as place markers. Then print the labels in large lettering on your own printer, and cut paste them onto the blue print. Steve
Re: DeltaCad e-mail attachments
Do you know of a way to e-mail DC drawing files to somebody who doesn't have DC? John, The answer is. you guessed it: a DXF file. That why the DXF files are created. DXF stands for Drawing X-change File. Thibaud - Thibaud Taudin-Chabot 52°18'19.85 North 04°51'09.45 East home email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (attachments max. 500kB; for larger attachments contact me first)
Attachments
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, David Young wrote: As a fairly new member of the list I was just about to send the results of a simple experiment I made during the eclipse as an attachment (because without the picture it would not have meant very much) when all the correspondence about attachments erupted. I have therefore not sent it thanking my lucky stars that my fingers were not burnt! However I do think Daniel's comments about allowing small attachments to be a good compromise. After all, a picture or diagram is often an essential part of a message when communicating about sundials. Greetings to All David In the immortal words of our American icon, Popeye the Sailor, That's all I can stands, I can't stands no more!! As an experiment, I will create a free Website. I'll accept and display graphical attachments, until I run out of space or time to maintain the site. Send me an email with a description of the graphic (or other binary, I suppose). I'll respond as soon as possible, but please wait until I do, before sending me the attachment. I'll upload it onto the page and send you all the URL. If this works out, it can save a lot of annoyance on this list! It may take a day or so to set up, but I will announce it soon. Dave Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note that this is a pseudo address. If you use this for sending me the above, it will be easy to keep separate from other mail!)
Re: Re Attachments
Dear Tony Why not do both: send your no e-mail image message at regular intervals AND also restrict the amount of data that can be sent? John Carmichael (This may be a repeat message - if so please accept my apologies) Fellow Shadow Watchers. Isn't it always the case? The moment you press the 'Send' button (as for the message below) a better solution comes in by return (Daniel Roth's email fixing the majordomo software to a small maximum!) Please ignore Tony Moss. All new subscribers to the Sundial Mailing List are reminded that only text messages should be sent to The List. Images in any form, JPEGs, GIFs etc MUST NOT be attached to messages. If you wish to share images then send a text message inviting individuals to make contact or place them on a website and give notice of the URL. *** Unless there is strong disagreement I could send out something similar to the above at regular intervals. The distinctive title with XXX YYY XXX would allow other members to discard it unread. Tony Moss
Attachments.
In long distance sailing there is a rule of thumb which advises not to make changes to the trim for ten minutes after small changes in sailing conditions, to ensure that these condition changes are true and lasting. I should have applied this rule to my response to Loy Chun's contribution to the list. It was afterall the first time he had made such a contribution and could not have known the conversations which had gone on on this topic before he joined us. Had I waited ten minutes before responding, I would probably have been a lot less direct and sharply critical. Loy has kindly written to me privately, and I am delighted to acknowledge this and offer my regrets to him publically for the sharpness of my response. May I also thank all those who have written to me with advice on ways to overcome the problems of expensive downloads. We have some expertise on this list! Paul Murphy
Re Attachments
(This may be a repeat message - if so please accept my apologies) Fellow Shadow Watchers. Isn't it always the case? The moment you press the 'Send' button (as for the message below) a better solution comes in by return (Daniel Roth's email fixing the majordomo software to a small maximum!) Please ignore Tony Moss. All new subscribers to the Sundial Mailing List are reminded that only text messages should be sent to The List. Images in any form, JPEGs, GIFs etc MUST NOT be attached to messages. If you wish to share images then send a text message inviting individuals to make contact or place them on a website and give notice of the URL. *** Unless there is strong disagreement I could send out something similar to the above at regular intervals. The distinctive title with XXX YYY XXX would allow other members to discard it unread. Tony Moss
Tony Moss's suggestion re attachments
Good suggestion, Tony. I'm sure that everyone cringes for the participants in this ongoing difficulty. It seems difficult to change human behaviour so would it be easier to change machine behaviour? Is it possible to command to 'bot that runs this List to NOT FORWARD ANY ATTACHMENTS? I am a mere egg in this stuff, but there might be whizards who could accomplish this apparently simple thing. Or is it not that simple? (Like, What time is it? to a diallist!) In the words of T.M., Just a thought. Tom Semadeni
Attachments and the cost of downloading
Message text written by Malcolm Purves It sadens me therfore that the only course left to me is to unsubscribe. We shall be sorry to lose you. I entirely agree with you when such attachments are very large. Unfortunately with the ease and smoothness of e-mail it is easy and frankly often quite advantageous both to sender and recipient to 'attach' some relatively small file with a message. I too have to pay with 'real money' :-) for telephone time, connect time and a monthly charge. For a long time - until January this year - I only had a 14kb modem and yet my view was and still is that provided the attachment is not huge it is still preferable to have it with the message rather than take the (not inconsiderable) extra time to go to the web site, find the appropriate page, wait for the pictures to come up, search the site for the file, wait for the virus warnings etc and then extract the file. This time can easily be more than that involved in downloading the attachment. With a 14kbaud modem a 50kb binary file (like a .jpg) takes some 36 secs to download. It takes 16 secs with a 33kbaud modem operating (realistically) at 31.2kbaud. You are certainly pushing it to get the same file from a web site in such times - especially if you have to wait for adverts. Indeed I suspect that often one could retrieve nearly a 100kb attachment before equalling the web site overhead. The point is though that if senders always used a web site the recipient could choose whether to incur this overhead or not. Hmmm, it's an interesting question as to whether (for a mail list message of true general interest) a probable majority should each be coerced into spending longer (and spend more money) to retrieve the message from a web site just to allow a probable minority to be able to choose not to down load. On top of that not everyone has a web site that can be used in this way and some do not know how to do it even if they have one. So, even though it's 'real money' for me (and I am retired too) I'd go for files to be attached if they are really necessary to the message and are short and sweet. Before you do leave though, why not consider an IPS (Compuserve is one) where you get sight of the size of the file before you have to download it? That might solve all problems. Maybe others on this list know of other mail systems that have that property..? Patrick
Re: Attachments and the cost of downloading
Malcolm Purves wrote snip It sadens me therfore that the only course left to me is to unsubscribe. This is a shame since I have enjoyed the contributions of the greater number of list members. It is the few who have now spoiled this for me. A similar problem arose on another list I used to subscribe to and the suggestion was made that a 'drop box' could be made available into which contributors could place large files for communal access. I have no idea how a 'drop box' operates and unsubcribed from that list before it came into use - there was so much correspondence it took half a valuable day to deal with! Is this a possibility in our situation? Tony Moss P.S. Don't send that 'unsubscribe' message yet Malcolm - there may be a solution.
Re: Attachments and the cost of downloading
This is addressed to Malcolm primarily, but pehaps others who are in the same position could join in... I'm very sorry to hear that you have been inconvenienced and feel you need to unsubscribe. I do understand the situation of having to pay for all connect time and transfers, and wish there was some way around the problem. I have to ask, what are you using for a mail client (reader)? What sort of mail service do you have, with your internet service provider? Can you set your mail reader to leave the messages on the server, and only download the ones you want? Normally, the mail header is displayed in the reader, with a flag indicating the presence of attachments, and the message's size. This should give you the opportunity to pick and choose which messages to read, and which to discard unopened. Do you have access in the UK to any of the free, Web-based mail services? Try subscribing through HotMail, NetAddress, or the like. With these, only the header is displayed, until you select a message to open. There is an added burden of graphics and (small) advertising banners with these, but they still may be an economical solution. Dave Bell On Tue, 7 Sep 1999, Malcolm Purves wrote: By private e-mail I recently asked the list owner if there was a form of the list that could be subscribed to without attachments. No reply to that effect was received so I presume not. However the list owner did post a reminder on the list about this subject just a few days ago. Nevertheless,yet again, someone else has ignored this advice and taken it upon himself do this thing and has sent a jpg, if we like it or not. Yet it is so easy to place such a thing on a free web page and post just the url, thus we would have a choice. indeed this latest poster already has a web page ! As I am one of those people who, as the list owner has said, have to connect to the internet via modem, also I have to pay per second for this facility, I have no company or institution to do this for me. I have previously addressed this sort of comment by e-mail to the persons directly about this form of netiquet. All to no avail. It sadens me therfore that the only course left to me is to unsubscribe. This is a shame since I have enjoyed the contributions of the greater number of list members. It is the few who have now spoiled this for me. Malcolm.
Attachments and the cost of downloading
By private e-mail I recently asked the list owner if there was a form of the list that could be subscribed to without attachments. No reply to that effect was received so I presume not. However the list owner did post a reminder on the list about this subject just a few days ago. Nevertheless,yet again, someone else has ignored this advice and taken it upon himself do this thing and has sent a jpg, if we like it or not. Yet it is so easy to place such a thing on a free web page and post just the url, thus we would have a choice. indeed this latest poster already has a web page ! As I am one of those people who, as the list owner has said, have to connect to the internet via modem, also I have to pay per second for this facility, I have no company or institution to do this for me. I have previously addressed this sort of comment by e-mail to the persons directly about this form of netiquet. All to no avail. It sadens me therfore that the only course left to me is to unsubscribe. This is a shame since I have enjoyed the contributions of the greater number of list members. It is the few who have now spoiled this for me. Malcolm.
Re: Attachments
Thank you for sending this note. It is a good reminder. Also, there are perhpas others, who, like me, cannot receive attachments. Please keep that in mind. Again, thanks, John
Attachments
Dear Dialists, thank you all for joining this list and for your contributions! Please keep in mind the information given in the first e-mail you've got after subscribing to this list. Esp. the third paragraph. - Daniel Roth, sundial mailing list Welcome to the sundial mailing list! This mailing list is for all who are interested in sundials and gnomonics. It was founded in February 1996 and has grown rather fast which I did not expect. Many sundial experts from around the world have subscribed and may assist you with your problems or questions. If you have information for other dialists, please post it to the list, e.g. if there is a new book about sundials. As long as a discussion might be interesting to other gnomonists please keep it up public i.e. make a copy to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post a mail to all subscribers of the list, please send it to: sundial@rrz.uni-koeln.de The mails sent to the list should not be too large because there may be subscribers who use a modem to connect to their provider (so, no binaries please unless small in size). Please cite not the whole of a message but just the passage you refer to. Please send commands like 'who sundial' only to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and not to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Otherwise all subscribers of the list get this. Thank you! The list-owner has compiled a list of links to sundial related WWW-pages. You can access this list at: http://www.ph-cip.uni-koeln.de/~roth/slinks.html Yet there is no FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) for this list - but I think it's a job worth to do. Coworkers are welcome! Regards - - Daniel Roth, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
attachments
Dear list members, thank you for the contributions to the sundial mailing list! But please remember what was written in the info file that you've got after subscription. You can get the file by sending the single line info sundial in the body of an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards - - Daniel Roth, sundial mailing list
