Smileys go to Ignorewood (was: Re: Licence unhappiness?)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was Sat, 4 Sep 2004, at 15:52:42 +0100, @ @ when Clive Taylor wrote: The only issue I have with smilies is that it's impossible to ignore the ):( type characters in the text - and that's just as annoying for me as seeing the actual graphic (but maybe I am a grumpy old s*d as my wife says). I'd be ecstatic if the next version of TB could filter these characters out of my received messages. The ecstasy's around the corner, and is lurking. I think it can be done with some macro and/or regexp template (at least in reply 'edition' of a message), but still cannot convince my attention it's worth of trying. - -- Mica :happypiglet: PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFBOd2H9q62QPd3XuIRAiGJAJ92qMtLctk2jqK2nZc9PxvTQ/DRFACgiuNQ jjwxBZHI9tj6CegROQvwNc4= =hAuF -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Smileys go to Ignorewood (was: Re: Licence unhappiness?)
The ecstasy's around the corner, and is lurking. Well, assuming you're talking about smilies and not drugs, that would be fantastic. -- Regards Clive T Nursing the under-developed TB 3.0 Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Smileys go to Ignorewood (was: Re: Licence unhappiness?)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was Sat, 4 Sep 2004, at 17:44:44 +0100, @ @ when Clive Taylor wrote: The ecstasy's around the corner, and is lurking. Well, assuming you're talking about smilies and not drugs, that would be fantastic. I'm talking about a colon cleaner, a macro/template which would remove all :anynumberanyletter: forms from a given message you reply to. (Therefore, no any health risk included; even contrarily.) It could be done easily, I believe, just by using an automated search-replace with regexp. But I re-think that removing them from original messages wouldn't still do anything useful (because of interrupting a consistency of the original, whichever it can be). Actually I am not sure if it would do something useful even in replies... Perhaps only sometimes. But is not bad, anyway, to have such thingy handy. (Ops, I see now that I didn't delete the previous followups when changed the subject... Let the Force decide what to do now...) - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: http://pgp.mit.edu/ once just before breakfast -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFBOgWI9q62QPd3XuIRAr+VAJkBwmllPIbN3n5Xl7ISFcZJ8Qs++ACffLXn zS0CFYwAhMg8hf6kVajz3Mk= =xdMq -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Smileys go to Ignorewood (was: Re: Licence unhappiness?)
But I re-think that removing them from original messages wouldn't still do anything useful (because of interrupting a consistency of the original, whichever it can be). I made the original suggestion somewhat lightheartedly; I recognise that it would be difficult/impossible to implement. Still it would be nice. (There - no smiley) -- Regards Clive T Nursing the undeveloped TB 3.0 Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html