The Tuesday 2004-03-16 at 20:24 +0100, Theo v. Werkhoven wrote:
Is that (72 char wrap) a defined internet mail standard? I don't know, I ask :-)
http://RFC.net/rfc1855.html - Limit line length to fewer than 65 characters and end a line with a carriage return.
Ah, but that one is not a standard definition: | Netiquette Guidelines | |Status of This Memo | | This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo | does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of | this memo is unlimited. So it is not a requisite to follow their recomendations :-)
On usenet 72 chars is considered a good compromise between mails getting too long, or lines getting too long. I think it's valid for mailinglists aswell. 65 chars leaves a bit more room for quoting characters in long threads though.
Mm, I don't know what Pine uses... ah, 74:
| composer-wrap-column =
In any case, Pine wraps those long lines when writing with a single keystroke and writes the necesary ">" simbols. I think it can be automated if I change something on the config, but I don't want to.
It's no nuisance to me... I'm sure mutt/vi can do a similar thing.
Of course, but I don't want to change the format of a mail in a reply, unless absolutely neccessary.
In this case, it is necesary, because you don't see the text otherwise. If the original formating is one long line per paragraph, it is obvious that the intention (of the program designer, not the user, who probably knows nothing about it) is for the recipient to reflow as needed. As for me, I'm used to quote trimming (some times I remove partial paragraphs or sentences, except from the middle), so the original format is lost, if any. Most editors will do some reflowing automatically, so that's some thing I don't care much about, I'm afraid. -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson