[plug] OT: word-wrapping of URLs

[Timothy White]

> > >
> > > On 8/16/06, Arie Hol <arie99 at ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > > On 16 Aug 2006 at 16:05, Shayne O'Neill wrote:
> > > > > Doh. Shorewall. Gotta config to make it work.
> > > >
> > > > For some interesting links goto :
> > > >
> > > > Beware the line wrap !!!
> > > >
> > > > http://www.lifehacker.com/software/networking/download-of-the
> > > >-day-
> >
> > hamach
> >
> > > > i- 147020.php
> >
> > In my case this would make absolutely no difference at all..
> >
> > Explanation :
> >
> > My email client is configured to line wrap at 74 characters -
> > this precludes the use of any form of bracketing - thus rendering
> > your suggestion ineffective for this instance.
> >
> > Reason :
> >
> > I line wrap at 74 characters as a courtesy to people who read my
> > email messages - this is to save them from scrolling to the right
> > for 500 metres - in order to read a long line of text.
> >
> > I get very annoyed when I need/want to read an email message with
> > no line wrap setting and need to scroll 500 metres to the right
> > to read the line ( mouse lead is only 1.2 metres long in my
> > case.)
> >
> > So as a result - I use "Beware the line wrap !!!" so that people
> > don't accuse me of posting a broken URL in an email message.

I think the reason it was suggested to use angled brackets (as I
introduced them to someone people who didn't know about them
recently), is your client, or their client, wrapping the text,
shouldn't effect it. Of course, this is really only useful for the
first email, because if you quote a wrapped line, then of course you
break the url even more!

In general though, if posting a link, surround it with angled
brackets, and then 99% of people won't have to worry about the wrap
(unless it is then forwarded on, or replied to), and you can still let
people know about possible wrap problems!!

Tim

-- 
Linux Counter user #273956
Don't email joeblogs at scouts.org.au