From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Is there a list for Limbo/Inferno discussion? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:09:47 +0200." <20000927110947.R26209@cackle.proxima.alt.za> References: <3.0.5.32.20000926010424.00abd100@mail.real.com> <970010357.24790.0.nnrp-14.c2decf94@news.demon.co.uk> <20000927110947.R26209@cackle.proxima.alt.za> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 12:08:33 +0100 From: Theo Honohan Message-Id: Topicbox-Message-UUID: 12c2e0dc-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 In message <20000927110947.R26209@cackle.proxima.alt.za>, Lucio De Re writes: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 08:53:30AM +0000, forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > > i was originally hoping to stick to usenet for open inferno/limbo > > discussion, because [...] > > PS: Your lines have crawled back to beyond my margins :-) > I've been wondering whether some level of support for RFC 2646 "format=flowed" would be an appropriate addition to acme Mail. Living among the fallen, I'm used to emacs's various adaptive and automatic filling modes. I often end up using them (interactively) to achieve the same wrapping effect as "format=flowed" in quoted text. It's not really very satisfactory -- it's too easy to mangle the text. "Format=flowed" seems to offer the possibility of safely automating the bulk of this work, and it's becoming quite widely supported. I would be interested to hear good or bad opinions about it from people on the list. (I suppose an alternative, in the UTF-8 mail world, would be to use Unicode "line separator" as a soft line break. Unless you also put in a CRLF at the end of each "line", though, you would run into problems with the SMTP line length limit (and non-Unicode readers would get even worse formatting.))