Thunderbird actually recommended a very useful extension

[John C.]

Diddling around in the program this morning, I decided to open the
Add-ons tab. Then I clicked on "Recommendations" and notice this one:

ThunderHTMLedit:

https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/addon/thunderhtmledit/

"Thunderbird HTML editor. This add-on adds a HTML tab to the composition
window where you can see and edit the HTML source of the message."

Seems to work as advertised too. Finally, a way around all the
formatting errors I've been experiencing.

--
John Corliss BS206. No ad, CD, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, pirated,
share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares for me please. I filter out
posts made from Google Groups and recommend you do likewise.

[VanguardLH]

"John C." <r9j...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Diddling around in the program this morning, I decided to open the
> Add-ons tab. Then I clicked on "Recommendations" and notice this one:
>
> ThunderHTMLedit:
>
> https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/addon/thunderhtmledit/
>
> "Thunderbird HTML editor. This add-on adds a HTML tab to the composition
> window where you can see and edit the HTML source of the message."
>
> Seems to work as advertised too. Finally, a way around all the
> formatting errors I've been experiencing.

Do you use HTML in your sig block? I've seen users that just must add
fluff to their signature, but they forget that their HTML will get
wrapped in the HTML for the entire new message (assuming you compose in
HTML which seems evident by your need for the extension). When I used
Thunderbird, I never got any HTML formatting problems, but then I wasn't
tacking on a sig block.

Don't know what might be the "formatting errors" in Thunderbird, but
maybe that's not why you posted and don't want to discuss it. For that
problem, I'd suggest visiting the mozilla.support.thunderbird newsgroup
(on Mozilla's news.mozilla.org server, port 119).

[John C.]

VanguardLH wrote:
> "John C." <r9j...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Diddling around in the program this morning, I decided to open the
>> Add-ons tab. Then I clicked on "Recommendations" and notice this one:
>>
>> ThunderHTMLedit:
>>
>> https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/addon/thunderhtmledit/
>>
>> "Thunderbird HTML editor. This add-on adds a HTML tab to the composition
>> window where you can see and edit the HTML source of the message."
>>
>> Seems to work as advertised too. Finally, a way around all the
>> formatting errors I've been experiencing.
>
> Do you use HTML in your sig block?

No.

> I've seen users that just must add
> fluff to their signature, but they forget that their HTML will get
> wrapped in the HTML for the entire new message (assuming you compose in
> HTML which seems evident by your need for the extension). When I used
> Thunderbird, I never got any HTML formatting problems, but then I wasn't
> tacking on a sig block.

My signature file for email is simply the word "John".

> Don't know what might be the "formatting errors" in Thunderbird, but
> maybe that's not why you posted and don't want to discuss it.

I didn't want to discuss it because doing so is tedious and boring.
Generally speaking though, it occurs when one of my friends or relatives
forwards me a poorly formatted joke that I want to pass along. I try to
correct the formatting and sometimes, it takes more effort than it's
worth. The ThunderHTMLedit extension will help me a lot when I do that.

> For that
> problem, I'd suggest visiting the mozilla.support.thunderbird newsgroup
> (on Mozilla's news.mozilla.org server, port 119).

You need to re-read my OP. I wasn't looking for advice on dealing with
Thunderbird's poor editing capabilities. It is what it is. As I said in
the OP, the extension lets me see what's going on when I'm composing an
HTML email and that will be a big help.

Also, I never post to usenet in HTML, as I'm sure you're aware.

[pez]

"John C." <r9j...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:rbd60b$el4$1...@dont-email.me...

=

"Works with Thunderbird 68.0a1 - 73"

[VanguardLH]

"John C." <r9j...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Generally speaking though, it occurs when one of my friends or
> relatives forwards me a poorly formatted joke that I want to pass
> along. I try to correct the formatting and sometimes, it takes more
> effort than it's worth. The ThunderHTMLedit extension will help me a
> lot when I do that.

Don't forward inline. That inserts the original message *inside* your
new message. Instead forward as attachment. The recipient will get
your e-mail with an attachment they open which will be the sender's
original message, not one modified for insertion.

Forwarding inline strips out the original message's content (including
HTML), but strips out all the headers other than those shown in an
attribution line within the *body* of your new message. Forwarding as
attachment means the next recipient gets the *full original* message,
including all headers, and with no mixing of their HTML formatting with
your's in the new message.

If you want someone to get the original message, forward it as an
attachment. If you want someone to get your modified version of the
original message, forward it inline.

[John C.]

VanguardLH wrote:

> John C. wrote:
>>
>> Generally speaking though, it occurs when one of my friends or
>> relatives forwards me a poorly formatted joke that I want to pass
>> along. I try to correct the formatting and sometimes, it takes more
>> effort than it's worth. The ThunderHTMLedit extension will help me a
>> lot when I do that.
>
> Don't forward inline. That inserts the original message *inside* your
> new message. Instead forward as attachment. The recipient will get
> your e-mail with an attachment they open which will be the sender's
> original message, not one modified for insertion.

And it will also have the email address(s) of whoever the message has
been forwarded to as well as that for whoever forwarded the message on
to me. This is one of the first things I remove when I forward an email
and why I do it inline..

> Forwarding inline strips out the original message's content (including
> HTML),

It'll do that if you only send out text-only emails. I send out HTML
emails like the majority of other people.

> but strips out all the headers other than those shown in an
> attribution line within the *body* of your new message. Forwarding as
> attachment means the next recipient gets the *full original* message,
> including all headers, and with no mixing of their HTML formatting with
> your's in the new message.
>
> If you want someone to get the original message, forward it as an
> attachment. If you want someone to get your modified version of the
> original message, forward it inline.

As I've already mentioned, I'm not asking for solutions to any problem
in this thread. I've been forwarding emails for almost 30 years now at
this point and I know fully well what I'm doing. I know the differences
between forwarding inline and forwarding as an attachment.

Getting around TB's formatting issues is something I've never failed to
be able to do, it's just that it always seems to be more difficult than
it should be depending on which email client the sender uses (Outlook is
the worst IMO).

The extension I found enables me to get around these issues easily.

It's like the difference between WordPerfect's "Reveal Codes" feature
and the horrible way that Microsoft Word displays a limited subset of
formatting codes.

That all I have to say at this point on this topic. I innocently posted
about freeware and here you are trying to turn this into some kind of
debate.

Over and out.

[wasbit]

"VanguardLH" <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in message
news:1srqcxty...@v.nguard.lh...

NB:
This add-on is free software. However, after a while it will request to make
a donation. People who have paid the minimum suggested contribution (US$
5.99) will receive a license code to stop further reminders.

--
Regards
wasbit

[John C.]

pez wrote:

> John C. wrote:
>>
>> Diddling around in the program this morning, I decided to open the
>> Add-ons tab. Then I clicked on "Recommendations" and notice this one:
>>
>> ThunderHTMLedit:
>>
>> https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/addon/thunderhtmledit/
>>
>> "Thunderbird HTML editor. This add-on adds a HTML tab to the composition
>> window where you can see and edit the HTML source of the message."
>>
>> Seems to work as advertised too. Finally, a way around all the
>> formatting errors I've been experiencing.
>

> "Works with Thunderbird 68.0a1 - 73"

Thx. I forgot to mention that. Current full release of TB and what I'm
using is 68.9.0.

[John C.]

Good Lord. It's true, although I haven't been nagged yet. I'm sure it
will happen though. The second it does, I'll disable it until the next
time I need it.

[David Catterall]

On 05/06/2020 11:14, John C. wrote:

> "Thunderbird HTML editor. ...

> Seems to work as advertised too. Finally, a way around all the
> formatting errors I've been experiencing.

Agreed. I liked it so much I sent him €10.

D.

[VanguardLH]

"John C." <r9j...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> John C. wrote:
>>>
>>> Generally speaking though, it occurs when one of my friends or
>>> relatives forwards me a poorly formatted joke that I want to pass
>>> along. I try to correct the formatting and sometimes, it takes more
>>> effort than it's worth. The ThunderHTMLedit extension will help me a
>>> lot when I do that.
>>
>> Don't forward inline. That inserts the original message *inside* your
>> new message. Instead forward as attachment. The recipient will get
>> your e-mail with an attachment they open which will be the sender's
>> original message, not one modified for insertion.
>
> And it will also have the email address(s) of whoever the message has
> been forwarded to as well as that for whoever forwarded the message
> on to me. This is one of the first things I remove when I forward an
> email and why I do it inline.

If the sender is putting the recipients' e-mail addresses in the TO or
CC headers, they are rude and ignorant. That reveals the e-mail
addresses of all recipients to each recipient. Tell the sender to use
the BCC header to send their distributed message. The BCC header is
never included in a send. It is a /field/ in the new-message compose
dialog. It is NOT a header added by the client.

The client aggregates every recipient listed in the TO, CC, and BCC
*fields* in a new-message compose dialog to create a list. Each
recipient in the list is then sent a copy by sending one copy of the
message to the server by the client issuing a DATA command; however, but
an individual RCPT-TO command for each recipient to the server. The
list is used to determine where the message gets sent. The TO and CC
headers are not used by the server to determine who are the recipients.
In fact, you can use a mailing list to send to many recipients, the TO
header could have "Joe's info report", but obviously the TO header's
value is not used to determine the recipients.

Keep returning the sender's e-mail as rejected if they list multiple
recipients in the TO and/or CC headers. That is rude. Shows the sender
is ignorant of using the BCC field when composing a message. They won't
change unless prodded and informed.

Forwarding inline means there is no clue who was the real sender. You
modified the content. In fact, you add anything you want in your new
message and claim it was a forwarded message, just like I can do here:

John sent the following message. Should we call 911 because he is
planning on committing suicide?

From: "George Floyd" <anyw...@somewhere.tld>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 11:20:11 -0700
Subject: I setup the cops

I'm still alive. The videos were a hoax. The cops were friends
dressed up as cops. I wanted to frame some cops, any cops, and make
viewers think they murdered me to spur riots and looting. I don't
really care about any legit protests. I want to cause chaos and
damage. May the world burn. I hate everyone.

The headers that your client adds are a select few from the original
message. They don't even have to be headers from the original message,
but something you typed into your new message, along with whatever
content you want to pretend came from the original sender. No one
receiving your inline forwarded message would know if was from Floyd, or
something you made up. There's nothing in the inline forwarded content
to show you are forwarding any part of an original message sent by
someone else. Forwarding inline means it is ALL your content.

Forwarding inline is no different than adding within your own content
'<someone> said, "<whatever>"'. It's still you claiming what someone
else said. When you use your client's own inline forwarding, are your
less rude than the original sender by masking out the From line in the
attributes to the quoted content? Else, you are publishing their e-mail
address to others without their permission.

> As I've already mentioned, I'm not asking for solutions to any problem
> in this thread. I've been forwarding emails for almost 30 years now at
> this point and I know fully well what I'm doing. I know the differences
> between forwarding inline and forwarding as an attachment.

But you are bending over and letting someone else ream you by you having
to accomodate their rudeness and ignorance by them not using the BCC
field. Also, they've already revealed the e-mail addresses of all
recipients to every recipient by not using BCC. I doubt every recipient
granted permission the sender to publish their e-mail address to anyone
and everyone.

I understand you don't want to be rude by publishing the e-mail
addresses of the other recipients. Doesn't Thunderbird let you edit a
received e-mail? If so, edit it to mask the TO and CC headers, and then
forward as attachment. Even when forwarding as attachment, there's no
proof you haven't modified the original message when forwarding to
someone else. Only if the original message was digitally signed would
it become evident you modified the original message. Alas, rare few
users get e-mail certs to digitally sign their e-mails.

> Getting around TB's formatting issues is something I've never failed to
> be able to do, it's just that it always seems to be more difficult than
> it should be depending on which email client the sender uses (Outlook is
> the worst IMO).

Yeah, Outlook adds Word-based directive/headers into the message which
are usable only by other Outlook/Word recipients. I don't recall there
is a user-configurable option to eliminate the Word-specific headers
that Outlook adds to outbound messages. Outlook will also use class
definitions for styles that will only be known by Word (Outlook uses a
stub of Word for rendering), like "<p class="MsoNormal" ...> ... </p>".
I don't have Outlook anymore to check if there is an option to disable
all this Word-specific tagging which is garbage and bloat to non-Outlook
clients.

Regardless of which e-mail client you use (as long as it supports
Exchange), e-mails sent through an Exchange server also have the server
insert headers that are not informational or RFC standards, but are just
for regulating messages through the Exchange server. The servers can
add other content, like anti-spam hashes or ratings, that are no value
to recipients, along with a ton of X-headers: non-standard headers that
can be for any internal use the server admin wants to employ.

Microsoft even has the audacity of altering incoming messages to modify
hyperlinks. As part of their ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) scheme,
they modify hyperlinks to point back at their own server which then
decides if the original target is safe for you to visit. When you click
on a hyperlink in an e-mail received through Hotmail/Outlook.com, it
doesn't point to the original target. It points back to some Microsoft
"safeprotect" server. That means Microsoft has to maintain a list of
original targets to equate with the safeprotect URLs. If Microsoft ever
decides to stop interferring and altering your e-mails by discontinuing
their ATP scheme, all those hyperlinks in your old e-mails become
invalid. It is guaranteed "link rot", because Microsoft *will* change
their stance someday. If you leave Hotmail/Outlook.com as your e-mail
provider, I don't know if Microsoft permits anonymous/non-account
connections to their safeprotect server; if not, all those safe links
become invalid. For those with business or school accounts, or those
who subscribe to Office 365, they have an option to disable ATP. For us
freeloaders, the option is not available, so you have to use their
feedback to request ATP be disabled for your account. I've done that,
only to find out later it got reenabled, so I have to ask to disable it
again. I have to check periodically to make sure some bozo at Microsoft
didn't reset my Hotmail account to start safe linking again.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/office-365-security/how-atp-safe-links-works
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/advanced-outlook-com-security-for-office-365-subscribers-882d2243-eab9-4545-a58a-b36fee4a46e2?ui=en-us&rs=en-us&ad=us

It's a bitch to be a spam reporter but the hyperlinks have been modified
to point back at Microsoft instead of the real target. If you're the
type that checks hyperlinks for phishing or scams, the safe links are
unusable to determine if the hyperlink-to-safelink-at-MS-server points
at a valid target or not. Microsoft considers its users too stupid to
interrogate the target of hyperlinks, so they fuck over the users that
do look at them. If their safe links service goes down (and it has a
couple times) or becomes unreachable, those safe links (altered
hyperlinks) in your e-mails won't work. Also, there is the privacy
issue in that Microsoft is recording all the hyperlinks in your received
e-mails (so they can do the lookup and check using their safe links
"feature").

> The extension I found enables me to get around these issues easily.

But I thought Thunderbird allowed you to edit a received message.

https://www.lifewire.com/edit-received-messages-thunderbird-1173144

My guess is that it just shows the HTML code as-is. Does the extension
pretty up the HTML to make it more legible? Newlines are not required
in HTML, so often the code is one huge long line, plus the HTML tags are
not aligned to show them in a readble format. That is, is the extension
similar to HTML Tidy to beautify (make easier the recognication) the
layout and colorize the tags versus attributes versus content? HTML can
be tough to read if not beautified.

This add-on is free software. However, after a while it will request
to make a donation. People who have paid the minimum suggested
contribution (US$ 5.99) will receive a license code to stop further
reminders.

Oh oh, it's nagware. That's why I never bothered to use Sandboxie
(although it's not all free, but I don't know if the last non-community
version was coded to NOT be monthly nagware).

After downloading the .xpi file for the extension and extracting it, I'm
starting to wonder if the author didn't purloin the code for the Ace
editor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ace_(editor). I don't see any
credit given to it. Ace is free open source (FOSS), but it uses the BSD
licensing which says any software using Ace must note the use of Ace. I
suppose Jorg is allowed to ask for donations for his code above and
beyond the Ace code which is the massive major portion of his code. He
did add code to add the tab to the composition window in Thunderbird.

Update: Just reread the extension web page which says:

Based on Ace HTML editor, https://ace.c9.io/.

So, he does give credit to someone else's work, and I was correct when
reviewing the JS code for his extension that it uses the Ace editor.
Does the extension's description itself credit the Ace editor?

I went to Jorg K's web site (http://www.jorgk.com/), but didn't see
anywhere he had a code repository other than the .xpi file at Mozilla's
add-ons site.

It can be handy to have an integral HTML editor in Thunderbird.
However, if you do HTML editing, you're likely doing it elsewhere, so
you'll already have an VDE (visual development environment) or IDE
(integrated development environment) for HTML, like Notepad++,
ActiveState's Komodo Edit or IDE, Microsoft's Visual Studio Community,
or Atom. The extension eliminates having to copy, paste, and copy back,
but it usable withon only one program.

> That all I have to say at this point on this topic. I innocently posted
> about freeware and here you are trying to turn this into some kind of
> debate.
>
> Over and out.

No, I'm discussing: something you didn't expect with what you intended
as a drive-by posting.

[VanguardLH]

"John C." <r9j...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> wasbit wrote:
>
>> This add-on is free software. However, after a while it will request to
>> make a donation. People who have paid the minimum suggested contribution
>> (US$ 5.99) will receive a license code to stop further reminders.
>
> Good Lord. It's true, although I haven't been nagged yet. I'm sure it
> will happen though. The second it does, I'll disable it until the next
> time I need it.

You'll have to remove it, and then make sure to delete any remnant
repository for it under the Tbird folder.

I noticed it devolves into nagware, but only in my next reply to you
after rereading the addon page, so wasbit noted it first.

[John C.]

No, you're stalking me. KNOCK IT THE FUCK OFF.

[John C.]

I won't have to do shit.

[VanguardLH]

Wrong. I habitate this newsgroup. Get over yourself. You are NOT in
control here.

[VanguardLH]

"John C." <r9j...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>> "John C." <r9j...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> wasbit wrote:
>>>
>>>> This add-on is free software. However, after a while it will request to
>>>> make a donation. People who have paid the minimum suggested contribution
>>>> (US$ 5.99) will receive a license code to stop further reminders.
>>>
>>> Good Lord. It's true, although I haven't been nagged yet. I'm sure it
>>> will happen though. The second it does, I'll disable it until the next
>>> time I need it.
>>
>> You'll have to remove it, and then make sure to delete any remnant
>> repository for it under the Tbird folder.
>>
>> I noticed it devolves into nagware, but only in my next reply to you
>> after rereading the addon page, so wasbit noted it first.
>>
> I won't have to do shit.

If the author is polite by NOT inteferring with the use of Thunderbird
by the user other than the extension has focus, the nag for donation
should only appear when the extension's tab has focus. That is, you
should only see the nag when you view the HTML edit tab.

From what I saw in the thunderHTMLedit-compose.js code, the nag appears
in the status line for the tab. So, you have to select the HTML edit
tab to see that status line to see if and when the nag appears. I
cannot see that the "pleaseDonate" message links to a web site for where
you can donate.

When you later reenable the extension the "next time you need it", you
aren't getting rid of the nag. It'll be there the "next time you need
it". If you intend to use this extension, you might not even notice the
"pleaseDonate" string in the status bar.

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 23:06:16 -0500, VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:

>>>> That all I have to say at this point on this topic. I innocently posted
>>>> about freeware and here you are trying to turn this into some kind of
>>>> debate.
>>>>
>>>> Over and out.
>>>
>>> No, I'm discussing: something you didn't expect with what you intended
>>> as a drive-by posting.
>>
>> No, you're stalking me. KNOCK IT THE FUCK OFF.
>
>Wrong. I habitate this newsgroup. Get over yourself. You are NOT in
>control here.

Guys, get a room.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
punk ass dole whore troll, no nothing innumerate religious maniac,
lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky

[John C.]

*PLOINK*

[Wildman]

On Sat, 06 Jun 2020 23:06:16 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Wrong. I habitate this newsgroup. Get over yourself. You are NOT in
> control here.

Neither are you. Everyone knows that Pooh is in charge here.

--
<Wildman> GNU/Linux user #557453
The cow died so I don't need your bull!

[VanguardLH]

A child speaks. Doesn't stop me from replying to your posts.

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Sun, 07 Jun 2020 10:37:01 -0500, Wildman <best...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Jun 2020 23:06:16 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Wrong. I habitate this newsgroup. Get over yourself. You are NOT in
>> control here.
>
>Neither are you. Everyone knows that Pooh is in charge here.

It's a heavy burden.

[Stehlampe 2020]

I don't know why, but Jorg K removed "ThunderHTMLEdit" from Thunderbird's AddOn-site (https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-us/thunderbird/addon/thunderhtmledit/).
When I went on his profile I saw that he links to betterbird.eu as his homepage, which contains ThunderHTMLEdit: https://www.betterbird.eu/addons#ThunderHTMLEdit