K
krw
Yes, if your intention here is to post for some reason other than to
read your own writing. That can be done without the expense of an
Internet connection.
BTW, make that five, six, twenty, or whatever.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Yes, if your intention here is to post for some reason other than to
read your own writing. That can be done without the expense of an
Internet connection.
BTW, make that five, six, twenty, or whatever.
K
krw
: >>: >>
: >>[snip]
: >>
: >>: > I don't know about "only thing worse", there are
: >>: > lots of worse things but make it a 4th complaint
: >>: > because it should not be someone else's burden to
: >>: > cope with non-standard quote marks - even if many
: >>: > newsreader apps can do so.
: >>
: >>It shouldn't be *my* problem if your software can't
: >>cope.
: >
: > My software copes with anything reasonable, but not with
: > idiots who misconfigure their software.
It's not misconfigured. Just configured differently.
In this case, "differently" = "non-standard" => misconfigured.
I
Ivor Jones
: > In article <[email protected]>,
: > (e-mail address removed) says...
[snip]
: >> It's not misconfigured. Just configured differently.
: >
: > In this case, "differently" = "non-standard" =>
: > misconfigured.
How do I know it's not your system that's misconfigured..? If it were
configured correctly, surely it could cope with a : instead of a > ??
Ivor
: > (e-mail address removed) says...
[snip]
: >> It's not misconfigured. Just configured differently.
: >
: > In this case, "differently" = "non-standard" =>
: > misconfigured.
How do I know it's not your system that's misconfigured..? If it were
configured correctly, surely it could cope with a : instead of a > ??
Ivor
F
Floyd L. Davidson
Ivor Jones said:: > In article <[email protected]>,
: > (e-mail address removed) says...
[snip]
: >> It's not misconfigured. Just configured differently.
: >
: > In this case, "differently" = "non-standard" =>
: > misconfigured.
How do I know it's not your system that's misconfigured..? If it were
configured correctly, surely it could cope with a : instead of a > ??
So just how many different possible quote characters is
my software supposed to work for? Idiots who want to
use a non-standard quote character can choose from 100
or so...
You may, or may not, be able to recognize the problem
with accepting any character as the quote character...
It's exactly the same as not recognizing any quote
character at all. Or, recognizing the standard and
looking at an article formatted with a non-standard
character.
See?
J
JosephKK
Actually, that's why it works so well as a balanced
transmission line.
I'd suggest studying transmission lines and antennas.
Start with Kraus.
I have built many twin lead antennas for VHF use. The distinction is
not so clear as you are advertising.
J
JosephKK
[snip]
: : Non-standard usage can make your posts harder to
: : understand, and more difficult for others. Apparently,
: : you don't care. I'm just adding one more response to
: : let you know that your non-standard usage is not
: : appreciated.
Ok, you're the *second* complaint in 10+ years. When that figure gets to a
noticable percentage, I might sit up and take notice.
Ivor
: :
: : Ed
Not one of the three news clients i have regularly used have any
problem with these quotes.
J
JosephKK
PCPaul said:Ivor said:[snip]
: : Non-standard usage can make your posts harder to : :
understand, and more difficult for others. Apparently, : : you
don't care. I'm just adding one more response to : : let you
know that your non-standard usage is not : : appreciated.
Ok, you're the *second* complaint in 10+ years. When that figure
gets to a noticable percentage, I might sit up and take notice.
Third. But don't worry about me, because *plonk*
The only problem with a straight plonk is that other peoples quotes
of the plonkee shine through. The advantage of that is that one
has a chance to decide the plonk should be retracted.
One of the major reasons that i do not plonk anything but pure spam.
J
JosephKK
[snip]
: > What can be confusing to people is the double ": :"
: > usage. That makes
: > it look like you quoted with ":" what your previous
: > poster quoted with ":". So instead of that quoted text
: > being understood as the part of
: > the parent post, it gets misunderstood as part of the
: > grandparent post.
: > It also looks like you or your software replaced other
: > people's quoting character with ":" or ": :". Whatever
: > anyone uses, that should be
: > left as is (unless it is clearly broken).
It's OE Quotefix and I've found the setting that caused it to convert the
existing quote marks and I've disabled that, so they should now be as they
were.
Hope this helps.
Ivor
The prudes are not listening any more.
J
JosephKK
[snip]
: > I don't know about "only thing worse", there are lots of
: > worse things but make it a 4th complaint because it
: > should not be someone else's burden to cope with
: > non-standard quote marks - even if many newsreader apps
: > can do so.
It shouldn't be *my* problem if your software can't cope.
Ivor
That depends on how non-standard you are. Just because some
newsreaders can cope does not make it standard or right. Your stuff
don't bother me none. News clients that produce non-quotable posts do
bother me, it makes trying to reply worthless.
J
JosephKK
It depends on how old the phones, or these days with modern
electrically powered phones, cordless/etc, the REN, number
may be very low per phone. IMO, no good reason not to get a
cordless phone these days as some are dirt cheap, except
it's nice to have at least one non-electric in case the
power goes out.
I think i still have an old trimline. If i can find it, maybe i
should plug it in. Not much advantage though, i will still have my
cell. I wonder how long the cell towers will function in a power
outage. The telco backup may not be any better. Maybe it is time to
get my amateur licence and a radio.
I
Ivor Jones
[snip]
: > So just how many different possible quote characters is
: > my software supposed to work for? Idiots who want to
: > use a non-standard quote character can choose from 100
: > or so...
My software (OE Quotefix, also OE as supplied) has a choice of three - the
standard > or : or |
: > You may, or may not, be able to recognize the problem
: > with accepting any character as the quote character...
: > It's exactly the same as not recognizing any quote
: > character at all. Or, recognizing the standard and
: > looking at an article formatted with a non-standard
: > character.
: >
: > See?
No. Sorry.
Explain again what exactly your *software* (as opposed to your eyes) does
with quote marks anyway..?
Ivor
: > So just how many different possible quote characters is
: > my software supposed to work for? Idiots who want to
: > use a non-standard quote character can choose from 100
: > or so...
My software (OE Quotefix, also OE as supplied) has a choice of three - the
standard > or : or |
: > You may, or may not, be able to recognize the problem
: > with accepting any character as the quote character...
: > It's exactly the same as not recognizing any quote
: > character at all. Or, recognizing the standard and
: > looking at an article formatted with a non-standard
: > character.
: >
: > See?
No. Sorry.
Explain again what exactly your *software* (as opposed to your eyes) does
with quote marks anyway..?
Ivor
I
Ivor Jones
: > On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 02:43:18 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
[snip]
: >>It shouldn't be *my* problem if your software can't
: >>cope.
: >>
: >>Ivor
: >
: > That depends on how non-standard you are. Just because
: > some newsreaders can cope does not make it standard or
: > right. Your stuff don't bother me none. News clients
: > that produce non-quotable posts do bother me, it makes
: > trying to reply worthless.
Which makes it the *software's* problem, not mine. If your software can't
do what you want it to, get software that can.
Ivor
[snip]
: >>It shouldn't be *my* problem if your software can't
: >>cope.
: >>
: >>Ivor
: >
: > That depends on how non-standard you are. Just because
: > some newsreaders can cope does not make it standard or
: > right. Your stuff don't bother me none. News clients
: > that produce non-quotable posts do bother me, it makes
: > trying to reply worthless.
Which makes it the *software's* problem, not mine. If your software can't
do what you want it to, get software that can.
Ivor
K
kony
[snip]
: > So just how many different possible quote characters is
: > my software supposed to work for? Idiots who want to
: > use a non-standard quote character can choose from 100
: > or so...
My software (OE Quotefix, also OE as supplied) has a choice of three - the
standard > or : or |
: > You may, or may not, be able to recognize the problem
: > with accepting any character as the quote character...
: > It's exactly the same as not recognizing any quote
: > character at all. Or, recognizing the standard and
: > looking at an article formatted with a non-standard
: > character.
: >
: > See?
No. Sorry.
Explain again what exactly your *software* (as opposed to your eyes) does
with quote marks anyway..?
Explain why we should need software with certain feature
sets to reinterpret something so you don't have to follow
standards. The whole point of usenet is to NOT need to do
these things!
K
kony
I think i still have an old trimline. If i can find it, maybe i
should plug it in. Not much advantage though, i will still have my
cell. I wonder how long the cell towers will function in a power
outage. The telco backup may not be any better. Maybe it is time to
get my amateur licence and a radio.
I've never had the telco power go out with a power outtage,
FWIW, but I've never had to endure one that was lengthly
(more than about a day). Since most outtages tend to be
localized to a small area a cellphone would certainly be
useful in most outtages.
F
Floyd L. Davidson
Ivor Jones said:[snip]
: > So just how many different possible quote characters is
: > my software supposed to work for? Idiots who want to
: > use a non-standard quote character can choose from 100
: > or so...
My software (OE Quotefix, also OE as supplied) has a choice of three - the
standard > or : or |
My software allows me to use virtually *anything*. It
could be a single character, or a string of characters.
Incidentally, it doesn't appear that you software is
using ":". It is using ": ". The added space isn't as
bad as the non-standard ':', but it's a waste of a
precious column, and leads to incorrectly wrapped lines
with many readers.
: > You may, or may not, be able to recognize the problem
: > with accepting any character as the quote character...
: > It's exactly the same as not recognizing any quote
: > character at all. Or, recognizing the standard and
: > looking at an article formatted with a non-standard
: > character.
: >
: > See?
No. Sorry.
Explain again what exactly your *software* (as opposed to your eyes) does
with quote marks anyway..?
I thought you knew all about this???
Specifically my software is the gnus package running
under XEmacs. I have it configured to display each
level of quoted text with a distinct font face. In this
case the significant difference is just the color of the
text.
It can also do things like reformat quoted text, and
will maintain the appropriate quote prefix. The
paragraph quoted above, with your ':' quotes, ends up
like this if it is reformatted:
: > So just how many different possible quote
characters is : > my software supposed to work for?
Idiots who want to : > use a non-standard quote
character can choose from 100 : > or so...
If it had used standard quotes, it could be
reformatted to look like this:
F
Floyd L. Davidson
JosephKK said:I have built many twin lead antennas for VHF use. The distinction is
not so clear as you are advertising.
In fact, it is. What is an folded dipole? As opposed to a loop?
C
CBFalconer
Graham. said:Ivor Jones said:[snip]
:> I don't know about "only thing worse", there are lots of
:> worse things but make it a 4th complaint because it
:> should not be someone else's burden to cope with
:> non-standard quote marks - even if many newsreader apps
:> can do so.
It shouldn't be *my* problem if your software can't cope.
I think software developers sometimes call this kind of dilemma
Postel's Law
It certainly establishes that my PLONK filter is correctly set.
I
Ivor Jones
[snip]
: > Explain why we should need software with certain feature
: > sets to reinterpret something so you don't have to
: > follow standards. The whole point of usenet is to NOT
: > need to do these things!
I don't understand why you need *software* (other than any standard
newsreader) to interpret what you're reading on the screen. I type words,
you read them - where does software come into it..? You can see perfectly
well which parts of the message I am quoting.
I ask again - what is *software* doing with my quote marks that upsets you
so much..?
Ivor
: > Explain why we should need software with certain feature
: > sets to reinterpret something so you don't have to
: > follow standards. The whole point of usenet is to NOT
: > need to do these things!
I don't understand why you need *software* (other than any standard
newsreader) to interpret what you're reading on the screen. I type words,
you read them - where does software come into it..? You can see perfectly
well which parts of the message I am quoting.
I ask again - what is *software* doing with my quote marks that upsets you
so much..?
Ivor
I
Ivor Jones
: >>Explain again what exactly your *software* (as opposed
: >>to your eyes) does with quote marks anyway..?
: >
: > I thought you knew all about this???
: >
: > Specifically my software is the gnus package running
: > under XEmacs. I have it configured to display each
: > level of quoted text with a distinct font face. In this
: > case the significant difference is just the color of the
: > text.
: >
: > It can also do things like reformat quoted text, and
: > will maintain the appropriate quote prefix. The
: > paragraph quoted above, with your ':' quotes, ends up
: > like this if it is reformatted:
: >
: > >: > So just how many different possible quote
: > >characters is : > my software supposed to work for?
: > >Idiots who want to : > use a non-standard quote
: > >character can choose from 100 : > or so...
: >
: > If it had used standard quotes, it could be
: > reformatted to look like this:
: >
: > >> > So just how many different possible quote
: > >> > characters is my software supposed to work for?
: > >> > Idiots who want to use a non-standard quote
: > >> > character can choose from 100 or so...
Ok, fine. But you are over-complicating things IMHO. Why do you need
different fonts for different levels of quotes..? The beauty of Usenet to
me is it is (theoretically at any rate) in *plain ASCII text* so all this
mucking about with fonts, colours or whatever that people do on the web
is, or so I thought, mercifully absent.
Seems I was wrong. But I'm not changing my quote marks. Live with it or
plonk me, it's all the same to me.
Ivor
: >>to your eyes) does with quote marks anyway..?
: >
: > I thought you knew all about this???
: >
: > Specifically my software is the gnus package running
: > under XEmacs. I have it configured to display each
: > level of quoted text with a distinct font face. In this
: > case the significant difference is just the color of the
: > text.
: >
: > It can also do things like reformat quoted text, and
: > will maintain the appropriate quote prefix. The
: > paragraph quoted above, with your ':' quotes, ends up
: > like this if it is reformatted:
: >
: > >: > So just how many different possible quote
: > >characters is : > my software supposed to work for?
: > >Idiots who want to : > use a non-standard quote
: > >character can choose from 100 : > or so...
: >
: > If it had used standard quotes, it could be
: > reformatted to look like this:
: >
: > >> > So just how many different possible quote
: > >> > characters is my software supposed to work for?
: > >> > Idiots who want to use a non-standard quote
: > >> > character can choose from 100 or so...
Ok, fine. But you are over-complicating things IMHO. Why do you need
different fonts for different levels of quotes..? The beauty of Usenet to
me is it is (theoretically at any rate) in *plain ASCII text* so all this
mucking about with fonts, colours or whatever that people do on the web
is, or so I thought, mercifully absent.
Seems I was wrong. But I'm not changing my quote marks. Live with it or
plonk me, it's all the same to me.
Ivor
K
krw
: > On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 02:43:18 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
[snip]
: >>It shouldn't be *my* problem if your software can't
: >>cope.
: >>
: >>Ivor
: >
: > That depends on how non-standard you are. Just because
: > some newsreaders can cope does not make it standard or
: > right. Your stuff don't bother me none. News clients
: > that produce non-quotable posts do bother me, it makes
: > trying to reply worthless.
Which makes it the *software's* problem, not mine. If your software can't
do what you want it to, get software that can.
This is only true if your intention is to write for yourself. In
that case, why bother the rest of us?