OT: Question re: reply format of this mailing list

[Thorsten Haude]

Hi,

* Henry Andrew wrote (2004-12-08 09:07):
>Hope I don't offend anyone by posting off-topic, but i'm curious as to
>why you all reply to messages by attaching an in-line message and
>writing your replies within the original message under the relevant
>parts?

Do you mean attaching as in MIME?

If you talk about quoting like I did with this mail: That's what
proved to be the most effective thing to do.


>Personally I think it is quite difficult to read the reply this way,
>especially in plain-text mode.  Is this something that has been
>decided at the list-level or is this considered to be generally good
>practice?

This may depend on the MUA you use. I sometimes read these kind of
mails without color support and they are less clear then. Make sure
your MUA supports either colors or has some other way to highlight the
different quote levels.


>Personally, I tend to strip the original mail altogether and just retain
>the subject line, so that I don't get a mailbox overloaded with multiple
>copies of the same data [text].  If there is something that I feel needs
>to included in the reply, I include just that specific text within
>quotes above my reply.

That's almost what I do. We might have different views on what's need
including, and we might use different quoting markers, but that's all.


For a longer discussion, see learn.to/quote.


Thorsten
-- 
Das Briefgeheimnis sowie das Post- und Fernmeldegeheimnis sind unverletzlich.
    - Grundgesetz, Artikel 10, Abs. 1 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20041208/c2431b82/attachment-0001.bin