From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/19034 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: No more buttons by default? Date: 21 Nov 1998 09:49:08 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <199811192101.QAA02436@alderaan.gsfc.nasa.gov> <86d86hwjk7.fsf@ponoka.battleriver.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035157457 9483 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 23:44:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from karazm.math.uh.edu (karazm.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.1]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA05263 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 1998 03:51:55 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by karazm.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAB16245; Sat, 21 Nov 1998 02:51:48 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sat, 21 Nov 1998 02:51:42 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA11223 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 1998 02:51:22 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sparky.gnus.org (ppp073.uio.no [129.240.240.78]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA05243 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 1998 03:51:14 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by sparky.gnus.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA04480; Sat, 21 Nov 1998 09:58:20 +0100 Mail-Copies-To: never X-Now-Reading: Greg Bear's _Slant_ X-Now-Playing: Tortoise's _TNT_: "Almost Always Is Never Enough" Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Dale Hagglund's message of "21 Nov 1998 00:12:40 -0800" User-Agent: Gnus/5.070053 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.53) Emacs/20.3 X-Face: &w!^oO~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\ writes: > I'm curious where you find this in the RFCs? I've been browsing RFCs > 2045 and 2046, and I haven't noticed anything that obviously implies > this, at least to me. RFC2183. > The only alternative I can think of is some sort of alternating > background color between for alternating background parts, ie, white, > light grey, white, light grey. However, with this, I loose the > ability to easily identify the part number for commands like `2 b' > from the summary buffer. But why would you want to `2 b' a part that's already displayed? It's fun to `b' a multipart/alternative and see it cycle through all the alternatives, but surely that novelty wears off after a while... -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen