My ISP is half-dead so I am left with no SMTP.

At 10:29 morn 11/5/02 +0530, SS wrote: On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 04:54:10PM +0530, q u a s i wrote: [..] good reason for breaking. An imbecile mail client is no excuse.

``imbecile email client'' is a real pain when a reader does not have >the option to choose his own editor within the client ... in my case, for example, when sitting on my desktop I use mutt with vim, but at other times, I have to rely on the web interface to our mail server ... I >can do nothing about how the web interface behaves!

I completely agree. The above was exactly the point I was trying to convey. But the unfortunate thing is you choose to comment on a sarcastic reply instead of the many "adjust your line length" "Get a smarter mail client" etc. etc. you see here. Linux is about choice -- or is that only a media mantra? The talk about 'rules' really pissed me off which resulted in more than necessary sarcasm. Sorry.

The only problem which I can think of is - in case of this reply >for example, I suppose my lines will get wrapped at some column by you >client which will introduce non quoted short lines. Well this is not my >fault as if you use no line breaking then my reply will appear correct.

Not breaking big lines in an editor does introduce readability >problems ... its really difficult to make sense of what's happening if one >has to scroll horizontally. There are editors like vim which can ``wrap'' >lines ... but that immediately affects navigation from line to line, and within sentences. `line' != `sentence'.

I beg to disagree. /Your/ choice of editor introduces problems. Mine does /not/. So how does that make your position superior in /any/ way? I live with inefficient use of screen space without cribbing about it - so maybe you can too.

AFAIK Mutt & Emacs as well as Pine handle long lines well under GNU/Linux. Just a matter of settings. In windows Eudora, OE & Emacs do it too. So? Where does this place us? The only problem is when one uses web interfaces - but then the problem is far more complex with almost all webinterfaces having a different column width. So I suppose we can ignore it.

Learning to use emacs is not exactly top priority on everyone's list.

I never suggested you to start learning Emacs. Just that there exists a client where it is possible.

I don't understand the need for a discussion - all we are asking is >for people to make a small adjustment in their mail editors, which will >make life easier for a lot of people. Its a time-honoured adjustment, well-supported by lots of guidelines on netiquette.

Yeah. The 'we' again. Yes Sir. As I see the number of people who want client side line wraping is really small (we are a minority), you can set whatever rules suites /you/. As always "it's about choice" applies only to the majority. I agree about time-honoured - but the times are changing and the very good reasons behind that guideline are no longer as relevant as they were before.

``Go get a better <insert any tool like editor, for example>!'' That sure sounds like somethings going wrong about the spirit of the >community, with a Redmond-ish touch to it.

The point is you should seriously consider /who/ is introducing this touch.

Note: Please note that even your /correct & superior/ line breaking resulted in broken lines without '>' in this web interface. I had to manually introduce the '>'.

quasi