Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Linefeeds.
Posted by
Bertho Boman
on 2000-04-08 05:18:12 UTC
That did not work either!!!
It looks like the composer inserts CRLFs after about 110 characters, regardless of
composer window size. I thought I had figured it out. Anyone out there that really knows
what is going on? It is ridiculous to manually have to insert CRLFs It is a pain after
being used to a word processor and cut and paste.
This time, I am manually inserting CRLF's at about 72 characters. Again, I have included
my previous posts just to see how they will look with the new manual formatting.
Bertho
==============================
Old manually reformatted post:
Ian and everyone else,
It did not work!
I just checked my own message and the auto-line wrapping apparently only applies to
"plain text" mode. I have the HTML turn on to get a nicer font and it inserted CRLFs
at the window size I used to compose the message (it was wide). So much for my theory
and goal of universal compatibility. I do not know why it is inserting the CRLFs or how
to disable it. I also forgot to mention that I am using Netscape 4.7.
This time, I have set my composer window to just fit the 72 number long string below.
1234567891123456789212345678931234567894123456789512345678961234567897 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I included my previous message under this new formatting size to see what happens.
We will see how this turns out.
Bertho
=======================================
My oldest message with manual CRLFs:
I really agree with Ian on the issue of too many CRLFs. People use the auto wrapping
feature and then they add extra returns in a line that is supposed to be continuos. The result
is a mess. Ideally, there should not be any extra CRLFs added except where really wanted
for formatting and readability. It should be the reader program's responsibility to format
the text to fit the user's selected window size. That way it will work regardless of what
country and what screen size/ format is used. To please some people, I have auto linefeeds
turned on at 72 characters but I think it is wrong for the above reasons. It really is the
viewer's responsibility to format the text the way he/she wants it. (No CRLF entered so
far, I just let the auto line-wrap work)
It looks like the composer inserts CRLFs after about 110 characters, regardless of
composer window size. I thought I had figured it out. Anyone out there that really knows
what is going on? It is ridiculous to manually have to insert CRLFs It is a pain after
being used to a word processor and cut and paste.
This time, I am manually inserting CRLF's at about 72 characters. Again, I have included
my previous posts just to see how they will look with the new manual formatting.
Bertho
==============================
Old manually reformatted post:
Ian and everyone else,
It did not work!
I just checked my own message and the auto-line wrapping apparently only applies to
"plain text" mode. I have the HTML turn on to get a nicer font and it inserted CRLFs
at the window size I used to compose the message (it was wide). So much for my theory
and goal of universal compatibility. I do not know why it is inserting the CRLFs or how
to disable it. I also forgot to mention that I am using Netscape 4.7.
This time, I have set my composer window to just fit the 72 number long string below.
1234567891123456789212345678931234567894123456789512345678961234567897 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I included my previous message under this new formatting size to see what happens.
We will see how this turns out.
Bertho
=======================================
My oldest message with manual CRLFs:
I really agree with Ian on the issue of too many CRLFs. People use the auto wrapping
feature and then they add extra returns in a line that is supposed to be continuos. The result
is a mess. Ideally, there should not be any extra CRLFs added except where really wanted
for formatting and readability. It should be the reader program's responsibility to format
the text to fit the user's selected window size. That way it will work regardless of what
country and what screen size/ format is used. To please some people, I have auto linefeeds
turned on at 72 characters but I think it is wrong for the above reasons. It really is the
viewer's responsibility to format the text the way he/she wants it. (No CRLF entered so
far, I just let the auto line-wrap work)
Discussion Thread
Larry Edington
2000-04-07 11:24:17 UTC
DRO Encoders
Tim Barnard
2000-04-07 11:42:02 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders
james owens
2000-04-07 13:18:46 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders
D.F.S.
2000-04-07 14:49:40 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders
William Scalione
2000-04-07 15:04:38 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders
Richard Gardner
2000-04-07 15:32:52 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders
D.F.S.
2000-04-07 15:33:51 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Linefeeds.
Jon Elson
2000-04-07 15:58:55 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders
james owens
2000-04-07 16:02:11 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders
Bertho Boman
2000-04-08 03:58:31 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Linefeeds.
Bertho Boman
2000-04-08 04:42:56 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Linefeeds.
Bertho Boman
2000-04-08 05:18:12 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Linefeeds.
james owens
2000-04-09 11:15:22 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders
David A. Forsyth
2000-04-10 02:02:48 UTC
Re: DRO Encoders
Marshall Pharoah
2000-04-10 12:50:39 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] DRO Encoders