james at turnersoft.co.uk
Tue Nov 3 04:49:41 UTC 2015
The following may be of interest to line wrapping aficionados:
Although this standard seems to have the potential to make everyone
happy I suspect its lofty goals are compromised by
incomplete/missing/buggy user agents (for either the sender, receiver or
What's Thunderbird like in this regard? Anyone fancy doing a few tests
with different combinations of client? Any bug reports/feature requests
to be filed?
For what it's worth, my preference is to see plain text messages,
displayed in a fixed-width font and wrapped at the traditional ~78
characters. Although the window in which the messages are displayed may
be considerably wider (e.g. when maximised to full screen) I still
prefer this narrower format. I don't like HTML messages.
I appreciate that not everyone shares these same tastes, but
(mercifully!) they do align with Wolves LUG mailing list
netiquette/style guidance and thus I haven't been flamed.
It seems that text lines in SMTP should are supposed to be 1000
characters or less (specifically 998 printable + CRLF newline) . As
such perhaps James H. could be negotiated down from using 2.1 billion
characters per line to a mere 998? We should press for even lower once
software that correctly implements RFC3676 proliferates. :)
 Wording "SHOULD be avoided", as per RFC 2821, section 4.5.3
More information about the Wolves