Re: Ruby (was: Scripts)

On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 04:53:15PM +0200, taliesin the storyteller wrote:
[snip]
> Quiz:
> When you start a new topic, should you:
> 1) Hit reply on some other message and type your message all below,
>    thereby not having to enter anything into the 'To:' and/or 'Cc:'-
>    fields and making it much harder to find.
Please don't. I use a threaded mailer just to keep track of the different
things going on in busy mailing lists like CONLANG, and it's rather
annoying to have new topics pop up in an unrelated thread, which gets
inadvertently mass-deleted when I'm not interested in the original thread.

> 2) Start an entirely new message, thus having to enter something for
>    'To:' and/or 'Cc:' and even something in 'Subject:', and *then*
>    start typing your message, thus making a new, visible topic in its
>    own, visible, separate thread?
Please do. :-)

Oh, and while I'm at it... please *do* use the Reply button (where
possible) when replying to a thread. Thread-aware mail programs know to
reference the message-ID of whatever you're replying to, and this will
show up correctly linked to the parent message in a threaded mailer.
Unless you're willing to manually reference the message-ID yourself (but I
suspect *very* few mail programs even let you see message-ID header
fields, let alone type them into an outgoing message yourself).

> And what's with the increase in html-mails already?!
I haven't seen many HTML mails on CONLANG (fortunately). But of course, I
could've missed a few of them just because I subconsciously delete them
without even bothering to read the subject line. (Yes I have a beef
against HTML email. Mainly because it's not universally compatible across
all platforms/mail systems. But also because they constitute 99.9% of
spam that arrive in my inbox.)

[snip]
> For the uninitiated:
>     The "ruby" is the commonly used name for a run of text that appears
>     in the immediate vicinity of another run of text, referred to as the
>     "base", and serves as an annotation or a pronunciation guide
>     associated with that run of text.
[snip]

Interesting. Personally, though, I still prefer LaTeX with the appropriate
macros. ;-) (But of course, I'm not expecting DVI to become a Web standard
in my lifetime...)

> Among much else, this is "Microsoft HTML"(tm). Scrolling all the way down on
> <URL:http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/reference/objects/ruby.asp>
> you'll find an example. Notice that the <RT>-tag is not closed (= there's no
> </RT> anywhere.) This makes it invalid xhtml and xml, so the form used on that
> page will not ever be valid, standardized, good whatever-ml. Don't use it!
[snip]

Yikes. This is not good. Incompatible HTML is Bad(tm).


T

--
Life would be easier if I had the source code. -- YHL

Reply