Re: login as root to GUI
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 12:49:01PM -0500, ronin2@bellatlantic.net wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 08:47:54 -0600
> Nathan E Norman <nnorman@incanus.net> wrote:
>
> > mutt does line wrap, but the default is ugly and hard to read. Many
> > popular and useful MUAs don't do linewrap at all. Furthermore, how
> > does someone effectively _quote_ text which is not linewrapped? Now
> > the local MUA has to be smart enough to precede each "unwrapped" line
> > with the appropriate number of quote characters. Let's just write
> > email in HTML if we're going to expect the receiver to reformat the
> > entire message[3 again]. This is email, not the World Wide Web.
> >
> > Sorry, but I think you're off on the wrong track here.
> >
> > [1] rfc 1855
> > [2] sorry for the hyperbole
> > [3] there was a huge thread on d-curiosa where some guy argued that
> > html email was the only way to go since it allowed more
> > expression. He was beaten severely about the head and shoulders.
>
> Ah yes, rfc 1855. Dated October 1995. A mere 7 1/2 years ago.
> >From the RFC:
>
> "This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind."
>
> You make my point about adherence to outdated "standards".
You're the one calling it outdated. Many members of this list prefer
to follow the guidelines within that document.
> I didn't say anything about using http. That's not something I proposed;
> it's a bit of that sophistry you decried.
Who said anything about HTTP? I referred you to a thread on d-curiosa
where the travesty of HTML email was being discussed; the poster
seemed to feel as you do that email technology was somehow lagging
behind. It's not cool enough! Let's make it _cooler_.
> Technology has evolved. Programs have evolved (well, most of them have).
> Practices should evolve as well. We don't all need to stay stuck in 1995.
We're not stuck anywhere. New protocols and communications media are
introduced frequently. However, we're not talking about new media, we're
talking about an established communications stream which has well-known
and expected standards.
Do you think email headers should conform to rfc 2822, MTAs should
conform to rfc 2821, or ip datagrams should conform to rfc 791? Heck,
rfc 791 is _22_ years old! We'd better get rid of that old, pathetic
piece of crap! I wouldn't buy any ethernet equipment that conforms to
IEEE 802.3 either as that's at least 7.5 years old.
Get a clue. Standards are, well, standards. If you want cool flowing
text, write a web page or distribute XML documents.
I noticed you had no response to the quoting problem.
--
Nathan Norman - Incanus Networking mailto:nnorman@incanus.net
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly,
while bad people will find a way around the laws.
-- Plato
Reply to: