Reply below quote
Tarkus
cursor in that blank line, immediately below the quote. Is this a known
bug? Replying above quote doesn't have that problem.
KristleBawl
> When replying below a quote, TB3 gives you a blank line, but places the
> cursor in that blank line, immediately below the quote. Is this a known
> bug? Replying above quote doesn't have that problem.
I don't know if it a bug or by design. Tb3 adds two blank lines and
places the cursor on the first, instead of the second, so I start my
reply with the down arrow before typing.
--
Tagline thievery... coming up on the next Geraldo!
KristleBawl's Taglines by http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
Localizations by http://www.babelzilla.org/ Get Involved
clay
way.
clay
> Tarkus expressed an opinion:
>> When replying below a quote, TB3 gives you a blank line, but places the
>> cursor in that blank line, immediately below the quote. Is this a known
>> bug? Replying above quote doesn't have that problem.
>
> I don't know if it a bug or by design. Tb3 adds two blank lines and
> places the cursor on the first, instead of the second, so I start my
> reply with the down arrow before typing.
>
I never noticed the second blank line.
I (usually) backspace over the blank line(s) above the sig delimiter,
and quoted by TB, then Enter down a line.
Or simply Enter, if no blank lines are quoted...
Guess that leaves a blank line to be quoted after my post.
Tarkus
> Tarkus expressed an opinion:
>> When replying below a quote, TB3 gives you a blank line, but places the
>> cursor in that blank line, immediately below the quote. Is this a known
>> bug? Replying above quote doesn't have that problem.
>
> I don't know if it a bug or by design. Tb3 adds two blank lines and
> places the cursor on the first, instead of the second, so I start my
> reply with the down arrow before typing.
That's what I do too. I don't consider the second line blank. I just
consider it the line where you start your reply.
Tarkus
If it's always been that way, it's either a longstanding bug, or very
poorly designed. It's also inconsistent with replying above the quote.
And if it's by design, what's the purpose of the blank line below the
cursor?
I guess I never noticed it in TB2, because it didn't have the selected
quote feature, and I usually had to clean up something at the end anyway
(often a quote marker on a blank line).
clay
> On 1/7/2010 3:31 PM, clay wrote:
>> Tarkus wrote:
>>> When replying below a quote, TB3 gives you a blank line, but places
>>> the cursor in that blank line, immediately below the quote. Is this a
>>> known bug? Replying above quote doesn't have that problem.
>> _(here's where the cursor started) TB2 does the same... Always been that
>> way.
>
> If it's always been that way, it's either a longstanding bug,
It's been discussed several times over the years. Bug or feature, I
dunno. S'pose one could search the bug reports. Probably find it
mentioned somewhere.
>or very poorly designed.
That's a little strong.
...
> And if it's by design, what's the purpose of the blank line below the
> cursor?
No idea. Never even knew it was there until KristleBawl pointed it out.
>
> I guess I never noticed it in TB2, because it didn't have the selected
> quote feature, and I usually had to clean up something at the end anyway
> (often a quote marker on a blank line).
One of the many discussions revolved around one poster who refused to
arrow down/Enter down a line to squeeze some space between the quoted
text and their reply.
They insisted since it was a function/feature of Thunderbird that put
the reply directly below the quoted text, they shouldn't have to exert
the effort to move down a line.
Tarkus
> One of the many discussions revolved around one poster who refused to
> arrow down/Enter down a line to squeeze some space between the quoted
> text and their reply.
> They insisted since it was a function/feature of Thunderbird that put
> the reply directly below the quoted text, they shouldn't have to exert
> the effort to move down a line.
While I'm a bit more considerate than that, and don't want my messages
to look sloppy anyway, he does kind of have a point.
It's not that it's that big of a deal, but it's annoying in that it
seems like it would be an easy fix (and I do believe the evidence points
to it being a bug and not by design).
A half-decent extension author could probably fix it, but I don't qualify.
clay
That's kinda where I'm at.
Until I'm in a position to actually contribute to the development of TB,
I strive to refrain from bashing it and learn to work with it, warts and
all..
First step would be to join in on the beta testing. Then I could whinge
about it constructively, anyway.
Now, tell me. Did you take your nic from the Emerson, Lake, and Palmer
album of the same name?
Tarkus
Well, I don't think I tend to bash, but sometimes it's the little things
that annoy the most, because they seem like such a simple thing.
> Now, tell me. Did you take your nic from the Emerson, Lake, and Palmer
> album of the same name?
Yeah, it rolls off the tongue easier than Brain Salad Surgery. ;)
clay
"It will work for you, it works for me..." from the song Brain Salad
Surgery, that appeared on Works Vol. II, four years after the album by
that name.
One of my all time favorite bands. Saw them at Cal Jam in '74 then on
their Black Moon tour almost 20 years later.
Cool nic.
I raced hydroplanes in my youth. Always wanted to name one Aquatarkus.
Figured I'd get sued or something... so I didn't.
Ron Hunter
I agree that the user shouldn't have to down arrow before starting to
type in order to improve readability. The program should do this, and
it doesn't. Why? Beats me.
--
Ron Hunter - rphu...@charter.net
clay
... or backspace over all the blank lines between the end of a post and
the sig delimiter.
Tarkus mentioned something about it working correctly when top posting
and I think that's the deal. Top posting, TB inserts two lines and puts
the cursor on the top one. Works great for top posts.
Apparently it's doing the same when bottom posting.
Oh well... if we're not arrowing down, were backspacing blank lines...
Terry R.
> One of the many discussions revolved around one poster who refused to
> arrow down/Enter down a line to squeeze some space between the quoted
> text and their reply.
> They insisted since it was a function/feature of Thunderbird that put
> the reply directly below the quoted text, they shouldn't have to exert
> the effort to move down a line.
If you are referring to andrew, that issue was replying with HTML to a
plain text message. In the compose window in HTML, everything looks
correct, but when posted, the spacing between paragraphs was gone.
Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
clay
> On 1/7/2010 9:23 PM On a whim, clay pounded out on the keyboard
>
>> One of the many discussions revolved around one poster who refused to
>> arrow down/Enter down a line to squeeze some space between the quoted
>> text and their reply.
>> They insisted since it was a function/feature of Thunderbird that put
>> the reply directly below the quoted text, they shouldn't have to exert
>> the effort to move down a line.
>
> If you are referring to andrew, that issue was replying with HTML to a
> plain text message. In the compose window in HTML, everything looks
> correct, but when posted, the spacing between paragraphs was gone.
>
>
> Terry R.
And was their reasoning not it was a Thunderbird issue/function/feature?
And was the solution not to manually put some space before the reply?
And did they not object to having to make this 'extra' effort?
I was referring to them. Wasn't sure it was Andrew though, so I left out
the nic.
I thought about adding a blurb about the html, in case the semi relevant
details police came along...*g* but decided not to confuse the issue.
Terry R.
> Terry R. wrote:
>> On 1/7/2010 9:23 PM On a whim, clay pounded out on the keyboard
>>
>>> One of the many discussions revolved around one poster who refused to
>>> arrow down/Enter down a line to squeeze some space between the quoted
>>> text and their reply.
>>> They insisted since it was a function/feature of Thunderbird that put
>>> the reply directly below the quoted text, they shouldn't have to exert
>>> the effort to move down a line.
>> If you are referring to andrew, that issue was replying with HTML to a
>> plain text message. In the compose window in HTML, everything looks
>> correct, but when posted, the spacing between paragraphs was gone.
>>
>>
>> Terry R.
>
> And was their reasoning not it was a Thunderbird issue/function/feature?
If each respondent replied in HTML, it worked properly. Mixed replies
did not, so it is considered a TB bug.
> And was the solution not to manually put some space before the reply?
No. HTML composing works properly unless replying to plain text.
> And did they not object to having to make this 'extra' effort?
Yes. It's a flaw in TB, and it's either ignored or compensated for by
everyone.
>
> I was referring to them. Wasn't sure it was Andrew though, so I left out
> the nic.
> I thought about adding a blurb about the html, in case the semi relevant
> details police came along...*g* but decided not to confuse the issue.
Terry R.