Re: Standard for soft return by automatic word and line wrap
Hi Camaleón :)
yes, I'm using Evolution, but if I quote from GUI mailers such as
Evolution, Thunderbird or OTOH from text based mailers such as Mutt and
Wanderlust, the quotes usually look okay, quoting the friends Alpine or
your Pan looks disgusting.
On Sat, 2012-08-25 at 13:48 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
[snip]
> > I experienced the same with mails from a friend and he told me that
> it
> > takes 78 signs for him.
> > Is there a standard for how many signs it should take to do an
> automatic
> > line wrap?
>
> Where to force a break is completely up to the user (it's a
> configurable
> setting) but the norm is set this length to 72 (or 80) characters,
> being
> the former preferable for either compose and reading.
>
> > I also wonder if there are any light weighted editors able to do no
> > automatic line wrap for programming and to do automatic line wrap,
> when
> > using them for non-program-code-text.
>
> I guess that many (Gedit, for instance).
Yes, but I won't call Gedit "light weight". I'm thinking of something
like Leafpad. FWIW I won't use vi(m), nano, emacs etc., it should be a
GUI editor.
> > PS:
> >
> 12345678-1-2345678-2-2345678-3-2345678-4-2345678-5-2345678-6-2345678-7-2
> > new line
>
> It renders and is handled fine in my newsreader.
>
> Now I will force a long line (>72 characters):
>
> 123456789-123456789-123456789-123456789-123456789-123456789-123456789-123456789-123456789
This line is ok, just the quoted text is borked.
Regards,
Ralf
Reply to: