Hello Stephane Bouvard [ML] & everyone else, the square brakets in your realname are getting pretty annoying, the listmailer again rejected the message as "containing to many recipients". :-[
on 26-Mrz-2006 at 11:57 you (Stephane Bouvard [ML]) wrote: >> Discouraged: readability, we've been thru that already. :-) > Avoiding hardwrap does not limit the readability as the reader remain > able to display the message with a 76 chars width... and a message > without hardwrap is much more readable on some devices than a message > with (PDA, cellular,...)... thus you told that hardwrapping is > encouraged to lower the readability of the mails ? :p I find your messages are pretty hard to read when you use WinEd. Because TB doesn't wrap incoming messages for me. Just like it doesn't "un-wrap" them for you. So, I could take just the opposite position and say "why doesn't everyone wrap their mails at column 73, it would help me so much." As I implied before, RFC2646 (format=flowed) must be implemented propperly in TB and all is well (if thats ever possible:-) - see http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2646.txt (notice the irony that the document is available as a hard-formatted plain text message:-) So I see no point to discuss this any further at the moment. Maybe you want to add your valuable comments to this BT entry https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=5016 because most of the comments there are "pro hard wrap". -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) I liked the opera very much. Everything but the music. -- Benjamin Britten on Stravinsky's The Rakes's Progress ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.71.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
