M
Mark In Maine
Guest
Personally, I'd rather have posters add the extra letters required to spell words correctly rather
than eliminate chrctrs to make their lines shorter!
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:36:00 GMT, Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 12 Jun 2003 10:20:00 -0700, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> [1] The two together mean your original text had better be under 76, and better under 72,
>>> chracters. You need to allow for a few levels of quoting chracters.
>>
>>RFC 1855 recommends 65 characters per line.
>
>That sounds overly conservative. Very rarely do I see people recommending under 72 or 70. Nothing
>wronmg with being overly conservative, per se, but you should know that that's what you're doing.
>Also depends how good the groups you write in are about snipping -- very rarely do you really need
>more than three levels of quoting. 65 characters allows for cascades.
>
>Jasper
than eliminate chrctrs to make their lines shorter!
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:36:00 GMT, Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 12 Jun 2003 10:20:00 -0700, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> [1] The two together mean your original text had better be under 76, and better under 72,
>>> chracters. You need to allow for a few levels of quoting chracters.
>>
>>RFC 1855 recommends 65 characters per line.
>
>That sounds overly conservative. Very rarely do I see people recommending under 72 or 70. Nothing
>wronmg with being overly conservative, per se, but you should know that that's what you're doing.
>Also depends how good the groups you write in are about snipping -- very rarely do you really need
>more than three levels of quoting. 65 characters allows for cascades.
>
>Jasper