On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 20:52, Robin Green wrote: > On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 04:39:15PM -0700, Rick Johnson wrote: > > >PLEASE WRAP YOUR LINES at less than 80 characters per line. > > > > What part of wrap lines doesn't he get? - two replies both unwrapped. > > It's 2003. Is this rule in place to deal with clients and archiving s/w > that STILL, in 2003, cannot wrap lines in received mails? Or is there > some slightly more valid reason? a) some clients indeed do _not_ wrap mails, and won't wrap mails, because: b) some UNIX systems are limited to ~512 character line limits in text files, including mail, by design; old standard states that's the maximum line length. (probably for old hardware, but still.) c) wrapped emails are usable by everyone, non-wrapped mails aren't, so guess which is more polite to use? d) it's 2003. do we STILL not have mua's that can just auto-wrap lines nicely for us? > > We are also told not to use auto-wrap. But is it really necessary to > return to the Typewriter Age - manual CRs and all - to send an email? Who would tell you to not auto-wrap? No need for manual CR's. Evolution wraps automatically. ViM can wrap automatically (for console mua's). I'm fairly sure Outlook can wrap automatically. If you want the client to be responsible for wrapping, use HTML mail. Otherwise, if you're using text, follow the norm and wrap lines. Thanks. -- Sean (who thinks HTML email is evil, and who's client does wrap lines for him, but bothers to try understanding other people's points of view... well, sometimes)
