F >From gpc-owner+M6134@gnu.de Sat Jul 23 09:41:37 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ejer5183@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz Delivered-To: ejer5183@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz Received: from matsrv.math.cas.cz (matsrv.math.cas.cz [147.231.88.1]) by artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9861A3FDC for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 09:41:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ngc224.gerwinski.de (ngc224.gerwinski.de [213.133.98.203]) by matsrv.math.cas.cz (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j6N7faRh014149 for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 09:41:36 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=gnu.de) by ngc224.gerwinski.de with smtp (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1DwEZH-0003c8-UJ; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 09:37:08 +0200 Received: from [64.12.137.8] (helo=imo-m27.mx.aol.com) by ngc224.gerwinski.de with esmtp (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1DwEYx-0003a1-GZ for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 09:36:57 +0200 Received: from Contestcen@aol.com by imo-m27.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r1.7.) id d.8.6cde95fe (4262) for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 03:36:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Contestcen@aol.com Message-ID: <8.6cde95fe.30134d6a@aol.com> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 03:36:10 EDT Subject: No HTML here, please To: gpc@gnu.de MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1122104170" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5041 X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) Precedence: bulk Sender: gpc-owner@gnu.de X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.85.1, clamav-milter version 0.85 on localhost X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_44,HTML_MESSAGE, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.64 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on matsrv.math.cas.cz Status: RO Content-Length: 6361 Lines: 108 -------------------------------1122104170 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I would encourage that, but please don't just dump HTML messages, > bounce them with the specific reason. That might improve the > breed. I looked at some of my emails to this mailing list, and I found the following HTML tags: a few standard tags at the front to establish that it was an HTML message, and to start the body. A BR tag at the end of each line in the body of the text, and some DIV tags where I skipped lines. Then I looked at your email, this one where you complained that I was using HTML. I found the following HTML tags: a few standard tags at the front to establish that it was an HTML message, and to start the body. A BR tag at the end of each line in the body of the text. The only difference was that there were no DIV tags. However, there was still pretty much one tag for every line in the file. In this forum, people apparently prefer > signs at the start of each line of quoted text. In fact, some people insist on that. You might not realize this, but those line divisions are achieved by using BR tags. As far as I can see, roughly the same amount of HTML is generated in your emails as in my emails. I can make it exactly equal by not skipping any lines. Would you prefer that? Would it be easier for you if my answers were always in a solid block of text without any blank lines separating paragraphs? Let me give that a test. Here is my answer repeated without the blank lines: I looked at some of my emails to this mailing list, and I found the following HTML tags: a few standard tags at the front to establish that it was an HTML message, and to start the body. A BR tag at the end of each line in the body of the text, and some DIV tags where I skipped lines. Then I looked at your email, this one where you complained that I was using HTML. I found the following HTML tags: a few standard tags at the front to establish that it was an HTML message, and to start the body. A BR tag at the end of each line in the body of the text. The only difference was that there were no DIV tags. However, there was still pretty much one tag for every line in the file. In this forum, people apparently prefer > signs at the start of each line of quoted text. In fact, some people insist on that. You might not realize this, but those line divisions are achieved by using BR tags. As far as I can see, roughly the same amount of HTML is generated in your emails as in my emails. I can make it exactly equal by not skipping any lines. Would you prefer that? Would it be easier for you if my answers were always in a solid block of text without any blank lines separating paragraphs? -------------------------------1122104170 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> I would encourage that, but please don't just dump HTML messages,<= BR>> bounce them with the specific reason.  That might improve the> breed.
 
I looked at some of my emails to this mailing list, and I found the fol= lowing HTML tags:  a few standard tags at the front to establish that i= t was an HTML message, and to start the body.  A BR tag at the end of e= ach line in the body of the text, and some DIV tags where I skipped lines.&n= bsp;
 
Then I looked at your email, this one where you complained that I was u= sing HTML.  I found the following HTML tags:  a few standard=20= tags at the front to establish that it was an HTML message, and to start the= body.  A BR tag at the end of each line in the body of the text. = The only difference was that there were no DIV tags.  However, there w= as still pretty much one tag for every line in the file.
 
In this forum, people apparently prefer > signs at the start of each= line of quoted text.  In fact, some people insist on that.  You m= ight not realize this, but those line divisions are achieved by using BR tag= s. 
 
As far as I can see, roughly the same amount of HTML is generated in yo= ur emails as in my emails.  I can make it exactly equal by not skipping= any lines.  Would you prefer that?  Would it be easier for you if= my answers were always in a solid block of text without any blank line= s separating paragraphs?
 
Let me give that a test.  Here is my answer repeated without the b= lank lines:  I looked at some of my emails to this mailing list, a= nd I found the following HTML tags:  a few standard tags at the front t= o establish that it was an HTML message, and to start the body.  A BR t= ag at the end of each line in the body of the text, and some DIV tags where=20= I skipped lines.  Then I looked at your email, this one where you=20= complained that I was using HTML.  I found the following HTML tags= :  a few standard tags at the front to establish that it was an HTML me= ssage, and to start the body.  A BR tag at the end of each line in the=20= body of the text.  The only difference was that there were no DIV tags.=   However, there was still pretty much one tag for every line in the fi= le.  In this forum, people apparently prefer > signs at the start of= each line of quoted text.  In fact, some people insist on that. =20= You might not realize this, but those line divisions are achieved by using B= R tags.  As far as I can see, roughly the same amount of HTML is genera= ted in your emails as in my emails.  I can make it exactly equal by not= skipping any lines.  Would you prefer that?  Would it be easier f= or you if my answers were always in a solid block of text without any b= lank lines separating paragraphs?   
-------------------------------1122104170--