Re: Reply-To in mailing list (Was: mailto: in Signatures)

2000-01-14 Thread Thomas Fernandez
Hi Allie, On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 23:23:53 -0500GMT (15/01/00, 12:23 +0800GMT), Allie Martin wrote: >> the same. Plain F4 results in a reply with no quotes at >> all. AM> You need to have text selected and then it will quote only the AM> selected text. If no text is selected it will not OK. W

Re: Reply-To in mailing list (Was: mailto: in Signatures)

2000-01-14 Thread Allie Martin
On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 10:58:50 +0800, Thomas Fernandez wrote: [..snip..] > I confirmn the same. Plain F4 results in a reply with no quotes at > all. You need to have text selected and then it will quote only the selected text. If no text is selected it will not quote anything. -- -=Allie=-

Re: Reply-To in mailing list (Was: mailto: in Signatures)

2000-01-14 Thread Thomas Fernandez
Hi Jast, On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 03:26:12 +0100GMT (15/01/2000, 10:26 +0800GMT), Jast wrote: >> That was *plain* F4... J> Maybe you have some templates interfering? As for me, I don' get any J> quotes at all whatever I do, since I have no quoting macro in my J> templates (I prefer to quote manua

Re: Reply-To in mailing list (Was: mailto: in Signatures)

2000-01-14 Thread Jast
Morning Steve Lamb, > Nope. There is a choice there that has to be made, why should the > computer assume which address to send to? The way I see it that's what the Reply-To header is for: Providing the information to which address a reply goes to. The assumption made is therefore correct. Th

Re: Reply-To in mailing list (Was: mailto: in Signatures)

2000-01-14 Thread Jast
Morning Szendrõ István, > That was *plain* F4... Maybe you have some templates interfering? As for me, I don' get any quotes at all whatever I do, since I have no quoting macro in my templates (I prefer to quote manually.) Anyway, worth a check. -- +--Jast |on W