Re: message.el patch

[asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren)]

On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 01:23:36 -0800, Jan wrote:

> Please consider that some people do not use "signatures" as per the
> usual usenettish understanding goes, but still want to append a
> piece of text at the end of each E-mail, text that depends on
> posting styles, etc. -- for all practical reasons: a signature.

Perhaps it would be easier to swallow if you seperated the two
semantically different things "adding some text at the end of the body
of the email" and "adding a .signature to the email", even though
functionally they are similar?

It makes sense to want to have no .signature and have something
automatically inserted at the end of an email, as you show (both
things at the same time make sense as well). Just don't call it a
.signature (because it isn't). What do you think?

> a) how I have signed this E-mail,

> b) what happens if I want to append something of this kind:

>    best regards, --Jan

> None of these things is possible with the current Gnus.

(I think that's stretching it a bit :-))

> Religious issues aside, I believe there are legitimate reasons to
> change the signature separator, especially if you accept that the
> definition of a "signature" isn't very clear cut at all.

What's the point in undermining the definition of a .signature even
further?


  Best regards,

-- 
 "Mr. Cotton's... parrot. Same question."                     Adam Sjøgren
                                                         asjo@koldfront.dk