Other readers' receiving my plain text e-mails with non-fixed width fonts...

[Ant]

Hello.

Some people's e-mail clients (e.g., Outlook and Apple' iOS Mail) seem to
use non-fixed width font for my plain text e-mails. Is the only way to
force plain text is to use fixed width font in HTML e-mail formats? Or
is there something else to force those e-mail clients to use fixed width
font with plain text e-mails?

Thank you in advance. :)
--
Rest in peace (RIP) to a young cousin as of 7/14/2015 early morning PDT.
:~( http://www.gofundme.com/zhvcd9h to donate.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) Chop ANT from its address if e-mailing privately.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

[Wolf K.]

On 2015-07-24 7:00 AM, Ant wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Some people's e-mail clients (e.g., Outlook and Apple' iOS Mail) seem to
> use non-fixed width font for my plain text e-mails. Is the only way to
> force plain text is to use fixed width font in HTML e-mail formats? Or
> is there something else to force those e-mail clients to use fixed width
> font with plain text e-mails?
>
> Thank you in advance. :)

I don't think you can fix that from your end. Every client deals with
plain text fonts in its own way, so the fix has to be at the recipient's
end.

AFAIK, there is no standard of any kind of how to specify fonts in plain
text so that all clients will see messages as the writer intended. Even
HTML isn't proof against the local machine's vagaries. Eg, if the local
machine doesn't have the font you've used, it will substitute a
"similar" one, or use some system default. Not to mention what may
happen when the user tweaks his system to use fonts (s)he prefers.

Have a good day,

--
Best,
Wolf K.
kirkwood40.blogspot.ca

[David E. Ross]

On 7/24/2015 4:00 AM, Ant wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Some people's e-mail clients (e.g., Outlook and Apple' iOS Mail) seem to
> use non-fixed width font for my plain text e-mails. Is the only way to
> force plain text is to use fixed width font in HTML e-mail formats? Or
> is there something else to force those e-mail clients to use fixed width
> font with plain text e-mails?
>
> Thank you in advance. :)
>

See my answer to your question in the mozilla.support.seamonkey
newsgrouop. Here, however, I will ask again: Why is this a problem?

--
David E. Ross

The Crimea is Putin's Sudetenland.
The Ukraine will be Putin's Czechoslovakia.
See <http://www.rossde.com/editorials/edtl_PutinUkraine.html>.

[Ant]

>> Some people's e-mail clients (e.g., Outlook and Apple' iOS Mail) seem to
>> use non-fixed width font for my plain text e-mails. Is the only way to
>> force plain text is to use fixed width font in HTML e-mail formats? Or
>> is there something else to force those e-mail clients to use fixed width
>> font with plain text e-mails?
>

> See my answer to your question in the mozilla.support.seamonkey
> newsgrouop. Here, however, I will ask again: Why is this a problem?

Thanks. I tried to crosspost originally, but none of those two
newsgroups showed my previous post.

I asked because the readers said my signatures are messed up on their
ends. :/

--
Rest in peace (RIP) to a young cousin as of 7/14/2015 early morning PDT.

:~( http://www.gofundme.com/zhvcd9h to donate. Note: A fixed width font
(Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.

[Ant]

Thanks. I guess I will just have to make a note to use a fixed width
font (e.g., Courier and Monospace) to view my signatures correctly for
my plain ASCII text e-mails. :(

--
Rest in peace (RIP) to a young cousin as of 7/14/2015 early morning PDT.

:~( http://www.gofundme.com/zhvcd9h to donate. Note: A fixed width font
(Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.

[Mike Easter]

Ant wrote:
> I guess I will just have to make a note to use a fixed width font (e.g.,
> Courier and Monospace) to view my signatures correctly for my plain
> ASCII text e-mails.

What you describe is a very common situation which both reader and
writer must accept.

I prefer to display plaintext news messages in variable/non-fixed. It
is very common for some news posters to like to embellish their sig with
some kind of ascii fixed-width construction which breaks in non-fixed.

If I want to see their art work, I just flip into source mode which
displays fixed.

Whenever I post a message in a newsgroup which is best viewed in fixed
such as columns of data, I include a line to instruct ('monospace for
columns').

There is a tendency for people to think that others are going to behave
as they do, which is not a valid assumption. IMO variable width is a
better way to display plaintext, except when it isn't.




--
Mike Easter

[Larry Gusaas]

On 2015-07-24, 10:27 AM Ant wrote:

Thanks. I guess I will just have to make a note to use a fixed width font (e.g., Courier and Monospace) to view my signatures correctly for my plain ASCII text e-mails. :(

I never use a fixed width font to read my emails. Never will. 😎

Larry

_____________________________________________________________________________

Larry I. Gusaas

Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan   Canada
Website:   http://larry-gusaas.com
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese

[John Kaufmann]

On 2015-0724 12:47, Mike Easter wrote:
> ...

> What you describe is a very common situation which both reader and writer
> must accept.

More's the pity - but yes, it's mature to accept what one cannot change.

> I prefer to display plaintext news messages in variable/non-fixed. It is
> very common for some news posters to like to embellish their sig with some
> kind of ascii fixed-width construction which breaks in non-fixed.

Well yes, but there are more functional reasons (as you note below) for
monospaced text.

> If I want to see their art work, I just flip into source mode which
> displays fixed.

? [This is what prompted my reply:] How do you "flip [plain text] into
source mode"?

> Whenever I post a message in a newsgroup which is best viewed in fixed such
> as columns of data, I include a line to instruct ('monospace for columns').

Just so: Fixed width is functional in any context where space itself is
meaningful; variable width has no functional value, but is often regarded
as ...

> ... a better way to display plaintext, except when it isn't.

:-) Nicely put.

--
John

[David E. Ross]

On 7/24/2015 10:05 AM, John Kaufmann wrote:
>
> ? [This is what prompted my reply:] How do you "flip [plain text] into
> source mode"?

Select the message. On the menu bar, select [View > Message Source].

[John Kaufmann]

On 2015-0724 13:28, David E. Ross wrote:
> On 7/24/2015 10:05 AM, John Kaufmann wrote:
>>

>> ? [This is what prompted my reply:] How do you "flip [plain text] into
>> source mode"?
>

> ... On the menu bar, select [View > Message Source].

Ah, you mean because source is always displayed in fixed width? ;-)

--
John

[David E. Ross]

Yes, at least in my Thuderbird setup.

[Chris Ramsden]

On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 09:26:40 -0700, Ant wrote:

>>> Some people's e-mail clients (e.g., Outlook and Apple' iOS Mail) seem
>>> to use non-fixed width font for my plain text e-mails. Is the only way
>>> to force plain text is to use fixed width font in HTML e-mail formats?
>>> Or is there something else to force those e-mail clients to use fixed
>>> width font with plain text e-mails?
>>
>> See my answer to your question in the mozilla.support.seamonkey
>> newsgrouop. Here, however, I will ask again: Why is this a problem?
>
> Thanks. I tried to crosspost originally, but none of those two
> newsgroups showed my previous post.
>
> I asked because the readers said my signatures are messed up on their
> ends. :/

Ironically, if you want to help your correspondents see your ascii art
properly, you should send in HTML and set a fixed-width font for the
relevant part. ;-)

As discussed, there's no way to force or coerce your correspondents into
using a fixed-width font.

But, seriously, you don't want to post using HTML to a newslist like this
where many users will have a news reader that simply doesn't support
HTML. I'm using Pan here (Linux) and Groundhog (on my Android tablet),
and neither render HTML.

[Tanstaafl]

On 7/24/2015 2:55 PM, Chris Ramsden <chris....@gmail.com> wrote:
> But, seriously, you don't want to post using HTML to a newslist like this
> where many users will have a news reader that simply doesn't support
> HTML. I'm using Pan here (Linux) and Groundhog (on my Android tablet),
> and neither render HTML.

Not to mention the fact that the longer an email signatur4e is the more
obnoxious is. A few lines of simple text is one thing, but sigs like the
one in question make me want to hit something really hard.

[Wolf K.]

On 2015-07-24 1:05 PM, John Kaufmann wrote:
[...]

> variable width has no functional value,

[...]

It's easier to read, and causes fewer reading errors.

[John Kaufmann]

On 2015-0724 15:43, Wolf K. wrote:

> On 2015-07-24 1:05 PM, John Kaufmann wrote:
> [...]

>> variable width has no functional value,

> [...]
>
> It's easier to read, and causes fewer reading errors.

Interesting that one should find it so. But surely "easier to read" is a
function of the content (we align text strings in many ways, including
tables and columns, to enhance readability) and the reader (in the extreme,
a machine reader always finds monospace text easier to read). IAC, I'm a
dunce about font design, but have long at least suspected that what you say
accounts for the popularity of variable-width fonts among many readers.

--
Best,
John

[PietB]

Tanstaafl wrote:

> Chris Ramsden wrote:
>> But, seriously, you don't want to post using HTML to a newslist
>> like this where many users will have a news reader that simply
>> doesn't support HTML. I'm using Pan here (Linux) and Groundhog
>> (on my Android tablet), and neither render HTML.
>

> Not to mention the fact that the longer an email signature is

> the more obnoxious is. A few lines of simple text is one thing,
> but sigs like the one in question make me want to hit something
> really hard.

For me that goes for "a few lines of simple text too", if it's
spam for 'free' antivirus of anti-spam (!) stuff or containing
crap like "sent from my iPug". Unless of course the latter is
meant as an excuse for the many typos. ;-)

-p