Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 11:22:08 -0800 From: underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) To: Bart Silverstrim <bsilver@chrononomicon.com> Cc: FreeBSD-questions Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Mail readers Message-ID: <mrbrmr8gtb.rmr@mail.comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <20040320061416.GA76966@moo.holy.cow> (parv@pair.com's message of "Sat, 20 Mar 2004 01:14:17 -0500") References: <200403182042.i2IKg2c18484@clunix.cl.msu.edu> <2C0C0548-791E-11D8-A66F-000A956D2452@chrononomicon.com> <d165d19syq.5d1@mail.comcast.net> <1BE441DA-799C-11D8-9BC6-000A956D2452@chrononomicon.com> <20040320061416.GA76966@moo.holy.cow>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Parv <parv@pair.com> writes: > Anybody still interested in this, should not miss ... > > RFC 3676, The Text/Plain Format and DelSp Parameters, Feb 2004 > ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3676.txt Thanks for the tip. It's a shame that people (e.g., MSFT and its supporters) can't all abide by the traditional simple rules or that we can't all switch to a new standard with (SOME) features of modern markup languages, but such is life, and RFC 3676 seems like a good compromise which should cut down on a lot of acrimony. Let's all lobby our mail software developers to add support for 3676. > ... which supersedes RFC 2646. "What does that superseding > actually translates to?", i do not know. Like with all RFCs, there's only a hope that people will follow the new ones, which often have features to deal with the fact that some people won't, at least for a while. (E.g., see the last paragraph of the RFC.) BTW, does anybody understand why 3676 refers to 79-column screens? (In addition to conformance to [RFC-2822], there is a historical need that all lines, even when displayed by a non-flowed-aware program, will fit in a standard 79- or 80-column screen without having to be wrapped. The limit is 78, not 79 or 80, because while 79 or 80 fit on a line, the last column is often reserved for a line-wrap indicator.) Anyone ever seen a 79-column screen width or know how common they are? I've never heard of one. (They obviously aren't talking about 80 minus one for a line-wrap indicator, but about 79 minus one.)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?mrbrmr8gtb.rmr>