Edit both messages being sent: HTML and pure text

[Balaco ocalaB]

Long time, no see!

I would like to edit the pure text message that is sent together with
the HTML message I prefer to compose - but which are grosely formatted.
Do you know if this is possible? Or do I have to sent 2 messages, every
time I want that a nice pure text message is also sent?


--
=
1.a. Você quer fazer um comentário, mas não quer mostrar
quem você é?
1.b. Do you want to make a comment for me, but do not want
to show who you are?

2.a. Você pode fazê-lo aqui:
2.b. You may do it here:

https://queroouvir.sarahah.com/

[😉 Good Guy 😉]

On 06/09/2021 21:06, Balaco ocalaB wrote:

Long time, no see!

I would like to edit the pure text message that is sent together with
the HTML message I prefer to compose - but which are grosely formatted.
Do you know if this is possible? Or do I have to sent 2 messages, every
time I want that a nice pure text message is also sent?

Send an attachment of your "nice pure text message". Just one message with HTML as well as Text message that is nicely formatted!!

Shame that Brazillians cancelled the Match between Brazil v Argentina. The entire world wanted to view this match on their TVs but the Health Officers had a different idea.

How's Pele doing? Is he out of the hospital or is he still undergoing checks?

--

With over 1.3 billion devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.

[Balaco ocalaB]

>> I would like to edit the pure text message that is sent together with
>> the HTML message I prefer to compose - but which are grosely formatted.
>> Do you know if this is possible? Or do I have to sent 2 messages, every
>> time I want that a nice pure text message is also sent?
>>
>>
> Send an attachment of your "nice pure text message". Just one message
> with HTML as well as Text message that is nicely formatted!!
>

For being pure text, will it be visualized together with the messages,
in most scenarios? I always imagined that Thunderbird usually did a nice
work with them, but i sent a block of preformatted lines in monospaced
font (a long set of formatted lines, a terminal session, with commands
and their output manually formatted for the message), and it was
completely destroyed! Thunderbird mixed all of them in a big new
paragraph - obviously, very hard to read and understand.

> Shame that Brazillians cancelled the Match between Brazil v Argentina.
> The entire world wanted to view this match on their TVs but the Health
> Officers had a different idea.
>

I heard that news. Bra*s*il and Argentina is always a good match. But i
have been pretty detached from soccer, in the last years.

> How's Pele doing? Is he out of the hospital or is he still undergoing
> checks?
>

I have no idea. I did not know he was in a hospital.

[Daniel]

Balaco ocalaB wrote on 7/9/21 12:53 pm:

>
>>> I would like to edit the pure text message that is sent together with
>>> the HTML message I prefer to compose - but which are grosely formatted.
>>> Do you know if this is possible? Or do I have to sent 2 messages, every
>>> time I want that a nice pure text message is also sent?
>>>
>> Send an attachment of your "nice pure text message". Just one message
>> with HTML as well as Text message that is nicely formatted!!
>
> For being pure text, will it be visualized together with the messages,
> in most scenarios? I always imagined that Thunderbird usually did a nice
> work with them, but i sent a block of preformatted lines in monospaced
> font (a long set of formatted lines, a terminal session, with commands
> and their output manually formatted for the message), and it was
> completely destroyed! Thunderbird mixed all of them in a big new
> paragraph - obviously, very hard to read and understand.

Balaco ocalab, normally I would have thought 'Good Guy' would be the
exact person to be able to help you with your situation ..... Because,
normally, when he starts a thread, he send a post containing both HTML
and *Plain Text* (not *pure test* ) and he posts whatever he wants to
ask in the HTML portion of his post and then includes, in the Plain text
portion, a message telling the reader that they should be reading in
HTML to read his actual post ...... which means a lot of the people
reading here *DON'T* read his actual post!

But reading what he posted in reply to your message, I'm not sure he
realises what you are asking .... either that or the process to post
separate messages in the one PT & HTML post is different to what I expected!
--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.53.6 Build identifier: 20210117210643

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.53.8.1 Build identifier: 20210717195939

[Onno Ekker]

Op 7-9-2021 om 9.38 schreef Daniel:

When composing in HTML, you can configure Thunderbird to always send a
copy in plain text. It's under Tools > Preferences (formerly known as
Options) > Composition > Composition > HTML Style > Configure text
format behavior > [ Send Options... ].

There you can choose to send messages in both HTML and plain text.

When you do this, a MIME "header" is added, telling the recipient that
the message consists of multiple parts and that you should read one of
those parts to actually see the message. Most Mail clients automatically
show one of those parts.

With Thunderbird you cannot differentiate the text in HTML format and
the plain text format, and I doubt if there's any mail client where you
can do that. It would be very strange if you see a totally different
message if you view the message in HTML of in plain text. Only the
layout of the message should differ.

Onno

[Grant Taylor]

On 9/7/21 2:02 AM, Onno Ekker wrote:
> ...I doubt if there's any mail client where you can do that.

I'm not aware of any mainstream email client that will allow you to
choose which (presumably equal) alternative parts to show.

> It would be very strange if you see a totally different message if
> you view the message in HTML of in plain text.

I actually see differences in content way too often.

Admittedly it's almost always bulk mail; marketing or spam, which has --
what I'll call -- real content in the HTML part and a generic place
holder in the text part; "This message is best viewed as HTML bla bla
bla....".

Rarely do I see text and HTML parts that are quite similar but have
incidental problems, like a utility bill email reminder fails to do a
substitution in one part that it does in the other, thus having place
holder text {{last-name}} / _BALANCE_DUE_ type thing.

> Only the layout of the message should differ.

Agreed.

Thankfully that's most of what I see.

My understanding (assumption) is that Thunderbird takes the HTML message
and strips the HTML formatting to generate the plain text version. I'd
think that would suffice for most things. The most likely problem will
be around white space alignment or non-printable text characters.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

[😉 Good Guy 😉]

On 07/09/2021 03:53, Balaco ocalaB wrote:

For being pure text, will it be visualized together with the messages,
in most scenarios? I always imagined that Thunderbird usually did a nice
work with them, but i sent a block of preformatted lines in monospaced
font (a long set of formatted lines, a terminal session, with commands
and their output manually formatted for the message), and it was
completely destroyed! Thunderbird mixed all of them in a big new
paragraph - obviously, very hard to read and understand.

Try this:

Create a <pre> ... </pre> block and paste your mono-spaced text between the two tags. Make sure the font-size is 10px or use something like so:

<pre style="font-size: 10px;"> ... </pre>

Replace dots with your text.

Good luck.

[😉 Good Guy 😉]

        For being pure text, will it be visualized together with the messages,
in most scenarios? I always imagined that Thunderbird usually did a nice
work with them, but i sent a block of preformatted lines in monospaced
font (a long set of formatted lines, a terminal session, with commands
and their output manually formatted for the message), and it was
completely destroyed! Thunderbird mixed all of them in a big new
paragraph - obviously, very hard to read and understand.
    

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 at 09:09:29, Grant Taylor
<gta...@tnetconsulting.net> wrote (my responses usually follow points
raised):

>On 9/7/21 2:02 AM, Onno Ekker wrote:
>> ...I doubt if there's any mail client where you can do that.
>
>I'm not aware of any mainstream email client that will allow you to
>choose which (presumably equal) alternative parts to show.

Turnpike (which was mainstream once! [Stopped in 2007, probably ceased
to be mainstream some while before that) does: I get two buttons, "Plain
text" and "multipart/related", at its top when I receive such a message;
IIRR, I can choose which I see by default (I choose Plain). [It doesn't
actually mention HTML, but I think that's what it means: it interprets
text size directives, among other things. Not online images.]

But I think Onno wanted the ability to _compose_ different content for
the two. (I'm not aware of any client that provides separate editing
facilities either.)

>
>> It would be very strange if you see a totally different message if
>>you view the message in HTML of in plain text.

It's actually increasing; there are the rude messages as below, but as
more and more companies (and, presumably, individuals, but I've only
seen it from companies) become less and less aware of what's going on
under the hood, it can happen unintentionally. I was receiving emails
from FindMyPast (the main competitor in the genealogy market to
Ancestry, at least here) containing increasingly older information,
eventually giving me details of offers whose closing date had passed.
Eventually, after much confusion on both sides (I asked what was going
on), I discovered they were sending two-part emails (I tend not to
notice the two buttons as they're so common), but something at their end
had broken, so the plain-text part of their emails (newsletters, latest
offers, etc.) had frozen with the content from many emails back. I did
tell them - the people I communicated with certainly had no idea they
were sending multipart emails, and had some difficulty understanding the
concept - but eventually the problem was resolved (though I never
received any acknowledgement, let alone thanks, for telling them).

>
>I actually see differences in content way too often.
>
>Admittedly it's almost always bulk mail; marketing or spam, which has
>-- what I'll call -- real content in the HTML part and a generic place
>holder in the text part; "This message is best viewed as HTML bla bla
>bla....".

Yes, usually fairly rude, e. g. something like "this message cannot be
displayed as HTML is blocked" ([a] which isn't true [b] what they
actually want to say in it doesn't _need_ HTML).

>
>Rarely do I see text and HTML parts that are quite similar but have
>incidental problems, like a utility bill email reminder fails to do a
>substitution in one part that it does in the other, thus having place
>holder text {{last-name}} / _BALANCE_DUE_ type thing.

Yes, I got one (from a bank, IIRR) which said something like "so you
know this is from us, we've included the second part of your postcode
here: ", followed by nothing, in the plain text part (UK postcodes have
two parts, like TN17 0DD). That went on for some time - might have been
years - though they did fix it eventually.

>
>> Only the layout of the message should differ.
>
>Agreed.
>
>Thankfully that's most of what I see.
>
>My understanding (assumption) is that Thunderbird takes the HTML
>message and strips the HTML formatting to generate the plain text
>version. I'd think that would suffice for most things. The most
>likely problem will be around white space alignment or non-printable
>text characters.
>

Or removal of newlines altogether. (Seems to be pretty universal - OK,
this is off-thread - in webform parsers; I've frequently typed something
into a webform that was nicely laid out, only to have it echoed back as
a horrible lump. I've taken to putting \\ on any blank line.)
>
>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The squeamish will squeam a lot.
(Barry Norman on the film "300", in Radio Times 30 March-5 April 2013.)

[Balaco ocalaB]

Em 07/09/2021 06:43, R.Wieser escreveu:
> Balaco ocalaB,

>
>>>> I would like to edit the pure text message that is sent together
>>>> with the HTML message I prefer to compose
>

> I've not heard of any standard newsgroup/email posting program which offers
> that.
>
> But you could put the txt into a seperate file and add it as an attachment
> to your HTML message (or vice-verse). As long as the newsgroup accepts HTML
> messages it will most likely accept attachments too.
>
> As a bit of a test I've attached a "some pure text.txt" file. Lets see if
> it works ...
>
> Downside : the message will than still/also contain the "all of them in a
> big new paragraph" text too, as that part is auto-generated - unless you can
> force a "HTML only" mode.
>
> But a suggestion : ask 'Good Guy' how he does it. There is a chance that
> he's willing to share that knowledge.

>
>> I always imagined that Thunderbird usually did a nice
>> work with them,
>

> It fully depends on how you formatted your HTML. Simple HTML tags (like
> BR, P and alike) are easily converted. Other more complex tags, not so much.
>

My problem is that Thunderbird completely and nonsensely destroyed the
contents preformatted in HTML. It joined every line as if them all were
a paragraph of simple text that we reformat with ctrl+r , completely
trashing all the text i needed and marked in HTML to be preformatted. It
is pretty stupid!!! (is this ctrl+r "feature" in some menu? i discovered
it by accident, and i never saw it anywhere).

Bold, italic, striked and underscored are formattings that i wanted to
show in text too (even if i have to do it manually, since TB is so
stupid to simply discard things).

[Balaco ocalaB]

Em 07/09/2021 14:18, 😉 Good Guy 😉 escreveu:
>
>
> For being pure text, will it be visualized together with the messages,
> in most scenarios? I always imagined that Thunderbird usually did a nice
> work with them, but i sent a block of preformatted lines in monospaced
> font (a long set of formatted lines, a terminal session, with commands
> and their output manually formatted for the message), and it was
> completely destroyed! Thunderbird mixed all of them in a big new
> paragraph - obviously, very hard to read and understand.
>
>
>

?

[Balaco ocalaB]

Em 07/09/2021 14:02, 😉 Good Guy 😉 escreveu:
> On 07/09/2021 03:53, Balaco ocalaB wrote:
>> For being pure text, will it be visualized together with the messages,
>> in most scenarios? I always imagined that Thunderbird usually did a nice
>> work with them, but i sent a block of preformatted lines in monospaced
>> font (a long set of formatted lines, a terminal session, with commands
>> and their output manually formatted for the message), and it was
>> completely destroyed! Thunderbird mixed all of them in a big new
>> paragraph - obviously, very hard to read and understand.
>>
>>
> Try this:
>
> Create a <pre> ... </pre> block and paste your mono-spaced text between
> the two tags. Make sure the font-size is 10px or use something like so:
>
> <pre style="font-size: 10px;"> ... </pre>
>
> Replace dots with your text.
>

Can we write HTML source when composing HTML messages? As far as i know,
we cannot. If i try to do as you said, i expect that TB will escape all
"<", ">" and possibly other things, and would simply show us "source
code of HTML written in HTML".

[Balaco ocalaB]

Em 07/09/2021 14:02, 😉 Good Guy 😉 escreveu:

On 07/09/2021 03:53, Balaco ocalaB wrote:

For being pure text, will it be visualized together with the messages,
in most scenarios? I always imagined that Thunderbird usually did a nice
work with them, but i sent a block of preformatted lines in monospaced
font (a long set of formatted lines, a terminal session, with commands
and their output manually formatted for the message), and it was
completely destroyed! Thunderbird mixed all of them in a big new
paragraph - obviously, very hard to read and understand.

Try this:

Create a <pre> ... </pre> block and paste your mono-spaced text between the two tags. Make sure the font-size is 10px or use something like so:

<pre style="font-size: 10px;"> ... </pre>

Replace dots with your text.

Try:

<pre>
2021.09.19 18:32:35 [  0] me@compo: /var/log
$  cd /
2021.09.19 18:32:38 [  0] me@compo: /
$  cd var
2021.09.19 18:32:41 [  0] me@compo: /var
$  cd log
2021.09.19 18:32:46 [  0] me@compo: /var/log
$  ls
total 13M
168K  alternatives.log
4,0K  alternatives.log.1
4,0K  alternatives.log.10.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.11.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.12.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.2.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.3.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.4.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.5.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.6.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.7.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.8.gz
4,0K  alternatives.log.9.gz
4,0K  apache2
4,0K  apt
   0  aptitude
 24K  aptitude.1.gz
8,0K  aptitude.2.gz
8,0K  aptitude.3.gz
8,0K  aptitude.4.gz
8,0K  aptitude.5.gz
8,0K  aptitude.6.gz
8,0K  auth.log
 72K  auth.log.1
8,0K  auth.log.2.gz
4,0K  auth.log.3.gz
4,0K  auth.log.4.gz
4,0K  btmp
   0  btmp.1
 48K  daemon.log
492K  daemon.log.1
 76K  daemon.log.2.gz
 40K  daemon.log.3.gz
 28K  daemon.log.4.gz
   0  debug
8,0K  debug.1
4,0K  debug.2.gz
8,0K  debug.3.gz
4,0K  debug.4.gz
4,4M  dpkg.log
240K  dpkg.log.1
4,0K  dpkg.log.10.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.11.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.12.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.2.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.3.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.4.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.5.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.6.gz
 12K  dpkg.log.7.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.8.gz
4,0K  dpkg.log.9.gz
4,0K  exim4
8,0K  faillog
 56K  fontconfig.log
4,0K  installer
4,0K  journal
164K  kern.log
984K  kern.log.1
236K  kern.log.2.gz
 16K  kern.log.3.gz
4,0K  kern.log.4.gz
 16K  lastlog
4,0K  lightdm
164K  messages
996K  messages.1
292K  messages.2.gz
396K  messages.3.gz
284K  messages.4.gz
4,0K  openvpn
4,0K  private
4,0K  runit
4,0K  speech-dispatcher
212K  syslog
1,6M  syslog.1
408K  syslog.2.gz
 80K  syslog.3.gz
 72K  syslog.4.gz
 72K  syslog.6.gz
 72K  syslog.7.gz
4,0K  teamviewer15
   0  user.log
 28K  user.log.1
 60K  user.log.2.gz
380K  user.log.3.gz
280K  user.log.4.gz
4,0K  vbox-setup.log
4,0K  vbox-setup.log.1
4,0K  vbox-setup.log.2
4,0K  vbox-setup.log.3
4,0K  vbox-setup.log.4
   0  vsftpd.log
4,0K  vsftpd.log.1
4,0K  vsftpd.log.2
4,0K  vsftpd.log.3
4,0K  vsftpd.log.4
 32K  wtmp
4,0K  wtmp.1
 68K  Xorg.0.log
116K  Xorg.0.log.old
 36K  Xorg.1.log
2021.09.19 18:32:50 [  0] me@compo: /var/log
$
</pre>

Let's see what happens... ((sending))

[Balaco ocalaB]

What you suggested does not work, @Good Guy.

[😉 Good Guy 😉]

On 19/09/2021 22:40, Balaco ocalaB wrote:

What you suggested does not work, @Good Guy.

[😉 Good Guy 😉]

On 19/09/2021 22:29, Balaco ocalaB wrote:

Can we write HTML source when composing HTML messages? 

Yes. Go to:

Insert >> html

[R.Wieser]

Balaco,

> My problem is that Thunderbird completely and nonsensely
> destroyed the contents preformatted in HTML.

That sounds like it just strips /all/ HTML tags, and possibly line-ends too
(if they where there to begin with). Yep, thats the absolute easiest way to
deal with a HTML -> text conversion - but regulary, as you have experienced,
gives crap results.

You could try to press the ENTER key at certain points in your HTML text,
and see if those line-ends survive the conversion of HTML -> text. It won't
give spectacular results, but at least than you can create paragraphs.

> Bold, italic, striked and underscored are formattings that i
> wanted to show in text too

Alas, plain textfiles do not have any such formattings. But, you can
always use "markdown" in them : "*bold*", "/italic/" and "_underscore_".
Most text editors/viewers won't do anything with those markdowns, but humans
will know what was ment. :-)

Bottom line : if you want both the HTML and plain-text parts to have
formatting to your liking you can't leave it upto the emal/newsprogram to
convert from HTML to plain text. Meaning you need to find an
email/newsgroup posting program which allows you to edit both.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[Ray_Net]

Balaco ocalaB wrote on 19-09-21 23:40:

Em 19/09/2021 18:36, Balaco ocalaB escreveu:

What you suggested does not work, @Good Guy.

Try this:
To make text bold in HTML, use the <b>this must be BOLD</b> tag or <strong>this must be STRONG</strong> tag. Both the tags have the same functioning, but <strong> tag adds semantic strong importance to the text.

[Balaco ocalaB]

Did you use Markdown syntax together with HTML formatting in your message? Which client are you using? I see the 3 inline examples you gave having their visual representation. But when i click on Thunderbird "reply as text", the default for this account, i only see the text and the Markdown syntax, as expected; but the same happens when i ask it to reply as HTML! This is strange to me. Thunderbird recognizes markdown, but just for showing messages??

Thank you for the other comments you made. They sum up and/or add to what i knew.    (:

This reply was composed as HTML, and i manually changed the message option to make both formats sent. Just to test, using both kind of syntaxes:

*bold*

/italic/

_underscored_

Please tell me what you see in both messages (i will do it too, anyway).

Thank you all,

Balaco

[R.Wieser]

Balaco,

> Did you use Markdown syntax together with HTML formatting in
> your message?

No, I wrote the message as plain text only.

> Which client are you using?

A very old one : Outlook Express 6 (OE6)

> I see the 3 inline examples you gave having their visual
> representation.

You mean you see them as bold, italic and underlined ? In that case its
your Thunderbird recognising the markdown (just as it recognises HTML).

> But when i click on Thunderbird "reply as text", the default for this
> account, i only see the text and the Markdown syntax, as expected;
> but the same happens when i ask it to reply as HTML! This is strange
> to me. Thunderbird recognizes markdown, but just for showing messages??

For HTML ? not /that/ strange : you're either using HTML *or* markdown. Not
both at the same time.

For plain text ? Not that strange either, as you than write what someone
else (like me) will actually see : with those "*", "/" or "_" characters
(single our doubled) next to the (group of) words.

> Thank you for the other comments you made. They sum up and/or
> add to what i knew. (:

You're welcome :-)

> **bold*
> *
>
> //italic//
>
> __underscored__

>
> Please tell me what you see in both messages (i will do it too, anyway).

When I'm reading it in plain text mode I see those words between two "**",
"//" and "__" sets - though for some reason the last "*" after "bold" has
been moved to the next line.

When I'm looking at it in HTML mode I see "bold" bolded, but also with one
asterix at both sides, "italic" in italic, again with one slash at both
sides, and "underscored" underscored, also with one underscore at both
sides. In other words, it looks like OE6 only needs a single "*", "/" or
"_" at either side of the word (and therefore displays the second one).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[Balaco ocalaB]

Em 23/09/2021 08:47, R.Wieser escreveu:
> Balaco,
>
>> Did you use Markdown syntax together with HTML formatting in
>> your message?
>
> No, I wrote the message as plain text only.
>

(...)

>> Which client are you using?
>
> A very old one : Outlook Express 6 (OE6)
>

Brave. hehe

>> I see the 3 inline examples you gave having their visual
>> representation.
>
> You mean you see them as bold, italic and underlined ? In that case its
> your Thunderbird recognising the markdown (just as it recognises HTML).
>

Yes, and this is curious. I never supposed it would do this.

>> But when i click on Thunderbird "reply as text", the default for this
>> account, i only see the text and the Markdown syntax, as expected;
>> but the same happens when i ask it to reply as HTML! This is strange
>> to me. Thunderbird recognizes markdown, but just for showing messages??
>
> For HTML ? not /that/ strange : you're either using HTML *or* markdown. Not
> both at the same time.
>
> For plain text ? Not that strange either, as you than write what someone
> else (like me) will actually see : with those "*", "/" or "_" characters
> (single our doubled) next to the (group of) words.
>
>> Thank you for the other comments you made. They sum up and/or
>> add to what i knew. (:
>
> You're welcome :-)
>

I would like to compose the messages in HTML, wanting TB to make
markdown text messages for bold, italic and underlined things, since
they are pretty natural, pretty good to give the same feeling as we read
the whole text. For titles from H1 to H6, it could use a few conventions
that are not hard to guess. Like, for H1, the text being completely in
uppercase and underlined by another new line of "=" characters.

>> **bold*
>> *
>>
>> //italic//
>>
>> __underscored__
>>
>> Please tell me what you see in both messages (i will do it too, anyway).
>
> When I'm reading it in plain text mode I see those words between two "**",
> "//" and "__" sets - though for some reason the last "*" after "bold" has
> been moved to the next line.
>
> When I'm looking at it in HTML mode I see "bold" bolded, but also with one
> asterix at both sides, "italic" in italic, again with one slash at both
> sides, and "underscored" underscored, also with one underscore at both
> sides. In other words, it looks like OE6 only needs a single "*", "/" or
> "_" at either side of the word (and therefore displays the second one).
>

Now, this message is only pure text, and i will simply use some markdown
in the next paragraph.

Ame como se ninguém nunca houvesse feito você sofrer. Trabalhe como se
não precisasse do dinheiro. /Dance como se ninguém estivesse olhando./
Cante como se ninguém estivesse ouvindo. Viva como se fosse no paraíso.
Curta o que de melhor a vida lhe oferece, com toda intensidade, como se
fosse o último dia da sua vida. A vida muitas vezes é curta, mas mesmo
assim, _o seu caminho é longo_. Nela aprendemos a sorrir, chorar, amar,
sofrer, e a renascer, para amanhecer e termos um lindo e novo dia. Não
deixe para amanhã o que pode ser feito hoje. Ontem já passou, e amanhã
talvez não chegue. *Seja feliz! Sempre!*

[Balaco ocalaB]

Em 23/09/2021 21:36, Balaco ocalaB escreveu:
>
> Ame como se ninguém nunca houvesse feito você sofrer. Trabalhe como se
> não precisasse do dinheiro. /Dance como se ninguém estivesse olhando./
> Cante como se ninguém estivesse ouvindo. Viva como se fosse no paraíso.
> Curta o que de melhor a vida lhe oferece, com toda intensidade, como se
> fosse o último dia da sua vida. A vida muitas vezes é curta, mas mesmo
> assim, _o seu caminho é longo_. Nela aprendemos a sorrir, chorar, amar,
> sofrer, e a renascer, para amanhecer e termos um lindo e novo dia. Não
> deixe para amanhã o que pode ser feito hoje. Ontem já passou, e amanhã
> talvez não chegue. *Seja feliz! Sempre!*
>
>

Just underline worked in my syntax here. And it works in all 3 options
that TB gives to seeing a message: original HTML format; simple HTML; no
formatting.

Do you think i used the markdown syntax correctly above?

[R.Wieser]

Balaco,

>>> Which client are you using?
>>
>> A very old one : Outlook Express 6 (OE6)
>
> Brave. hehe

Not really. All these years it has been doing pretty-much exactly what I
needed it for (even though I made some alterations), so I have no need to
replace it with something else.

Though I would not mind taking a look at a (email and) newsgroup reader
which would allow me to script (vbs?, js?, other?) my own actions (coloring,
marking, multi-level hiding) for incoming messages. OE6 only allows me to
select some pre-defined ones, which simply do not do the trick well enough.

>> You mean you see them as bold, italic and underlined ? In that case its
>> your Thunderbird recognising the markdown (just as it recognises HTML).
>
> Yes, and this is curious. I never supposed it would do this.

I would never have thought that usenet read/write programs would support
HTML. But here we are. :-)

> Now, this message is only pure text, and i will simply use some
> markdown in the next paragraph.

All I see is flat text. OE6 doesn't try to interpret the markdowns.

But a bit of a warning : those markdown symbols also have a normal usage,
and could easily cause unexpected, strange results.

I wonder what you see when I write 7*5+3*8 .... Something like 75+38 with
the 5+3 part bold perhaps ?

Same for linux pathnames : /user/configuration. You might see that as
"userconfiguration" with the first word in italics ...

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[Daniel]

It's my understanding that when you want to put some HTML-type coding in
a plain text file, the 'other side' of the HTML-type coding *HAD* to be
a space, so your 7*5+3*8 would _NEVER_ be /interpreted/ as some
HTML-type coding because of the '7' and '8' being where spaces should
be. ..... so *5+3* might show up as BOLDED ... but the '+' might muck
things up (be a non-recognised character).

[R.Wieser]

Daniel,

> It's my understanding that when you want to put some HTML-type coding in a
> plain text file, the 'other side' of the HTML-type coding *HAD* to be a
> space

Ah, yes. A simple solution that would fix most of the problems I indicated.
Smart. :-)

> so *5+3* might show up as BOLDED ... but the '+' might muck things up (be
> a non-recognised character).

You think so ? I would think that if the parsing is smart enough to expect
a leading and trailing whitespace char on those markdown symbols that it
would not be phased by some embedded non-alpha chars.

Hmm... Maybe I should see if there is a "markdown" spec somewhere ... Maybe
even an RFC ...

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[Balaco ocalaB]

Em 24/09/2021 06:10, R.Wieser escreveu:
> Balaco,
>

[cut]

>> Now, this message is only pure text, and i will simply use some
>> markdown in the next paragraph.
>
> All I see is flat text. OE6 doesn't try to interpret the markdowns.
>

In email messages exchanged outside this group, i discovered that
Thunderbird *does* some markdown processing. But it is not good. For
example, the following paragraph should have just a sentence in bold,
but TB shows also in bold everything until the paragraph end:

Bla blabla bla blabla bla bla blabla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla
blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla. *Blablabla bla
blabla??* Bla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla. Bla blabla bla
blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla.

In a reply for the message that contained the previous paragraph, i
edited it with a little change: the position of the second asterisc.

Bla blabla bla blabla bla bla blabla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla
blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla. *Blablabla bla
blabla*?? Bla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla. Bla blabla bla
blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla bla blabla.

So, the markdown processing that TB does is bad.

> But a bit of a warning : those markdown symbols also have a normal usage,
> and could easily cause unexpected, strange results.
>
> I wonder what you see when I write 7*5+3*8 .... Something like 75+38 with
> the 5+3 part bold perhaps ?
>

Given the example i just showed, it seems that it would not be
considered a "bold region" - and it is really not, as i just read in
your message before replying you.

> Same for linux pathnames : /user/configuration. You might see that as
> "userconfiguration" with the first word in italics ...
>

Again, the same should apply.

What TB, sadly, does not do, is to always send markdown'ed messages when
i edited HTML ones and choose to send 2 copies: pure text and HTML
formatted.

[Balaco ocalaB]

Em 20/09/2021 16:49, Ray_Net escreveu:

in HTML, use the <b>this must be BOLD</b> tag or 
<strong>this must be STRONG</strong> tag

in HTML, use the this must be BOLD tag. And this must be STRONG tag.

I composed this message to send 2 copies: pure text and HTML. And in the previous paragraph, i inserted HTML code 2 times, with the exact examples you gave. Let's see what TB does with it.