LL-L "Technica" 2010.02.08 (05) [EN]

[Lowlands-L List]

===============================================
L O W L A N D S - L - 08 February 2010 - Volume 05
lowlands.list at gmail.com - http://lowlands-l.net/
Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
===============================================

From: "Joachim Kreimer-de Fries" <soz-red at jpberlin.de>
Subject: LL-L "Technica" 2010.02.09 (01) [EN]

Am 08.02.2010, 21:54 Uhr, Reinhard F. Hahn wrote:

    I did change the "Reply to" thing. Thanks also for that.


Thank you Ron, for your effort. Unfortunately nothing is changed yet. When
I hit "reply" I still get "lowlands.list at gmail.com" into the To: field and
not LOWLANDS-L at listserv.linguistlist.org as it should. In the (normally
hidden) header of the LL-Listmails it still reads:

"Reply-To: lowlands.list at gmail.com"

So, no wonder.

    "Ugly" ... huh? Hmm ... Ain't in the eye of the beholder?


Sorry, I didn't want to effect you personally. And probably the diction is
due to my lack of English. Perhaps I should have write "unhandy". That is,
I have difficulties to read the digests of it sent to us; I never know,
how to quote in a way,
that I can be sure, that others are able to read it, to see what is my
writing and what is quoted etc.

This kind of difficulties result therefrom:

Instead of being a mailing list (which's server would act as a relay,
distributing each single posting of one member to all members, regardless
whether first submitted to a moderation or not), LL-List is a sort of
gathering place, where an administrator (you, Reinhard, I suppose) puts
each single arrived mail 'by hand" into a container mail - which is
html-formatted with as basic "font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif"
(which I can read with difficulties) - by somebody - you - who cures even
about such things as
how to get represented the different quotation techniques of the different
mail programs in different mail formattings… Or as you answered:

    Most people's submissions don't come with > or other markers for
    quoted text. Many of them have other colors or a gray line. In plain
    text I would have to manually mark everything, which is a lot of extra
    work.


Yes, it is not easy and sometimes undoable to copy from one (especially
e-mail programm) into another mail. A work which e-mail programs in itself
do in one way or another correctly. Try - just simulating - to answer to
regardless
which and how formatted mail within your e-mail program. If it is one on
the standard let's say at least of the year 2000, it will quote the e-mail
you are
answering to in a reasonable and readable way (also for the hypothetic
receiver of
your sending out).

    Bolding and italicizing are two very useful devices in linguistics. In
    plain text we would have to put words into * * and / / respectively,
    and / / also stands for phonemic representations in linguistics.
    (Italics are always used for foreign segments in English.)

Yes, of course. But I had never problems to understand the meaning of
plain text tricks as _underling_, *bold text* and /italic/. For the letter
indeed because of it's other meaning in linguistics one has to find some
other symbolization like 'segment', »segment« or the like.

    Once in a while I, once in a blue moon someone else submits something
    with tables. Simulating tables in plain text comes out with uneven
    spacing on different systems. Talking about "ugly" ...

This is an argument. Regardless wether someone of us is able to insert a
table into a html-formatted mail, which will be arriving as such. It might
be possible some way. I did it once for testing, but do not remember
whether I got it back correct. As I wrote, I have no problems, when
html-formatted mails are sent through.

Conversely, I am not pleased that you sent out my last html-mail to this
issue - which quoted html mails of you and Hanne Hinz - for demonstration
and argumenting purposed - as plain text - so destroying any sense of it.
I'm still disposed to regard it as an unwariness and not as an unfriendly
act …

    Sent in plain text
    ¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ © ª « ¬ ¬ ¬® ¯ ° ± ² ³ ´ µ ¶ • ¸ ¹ º » ¼ ½ ¾ ¿ À Á  Ã
    Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê Ë Ì Í Î Ï Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö × Ø Ù Ú Û Ü Ý Þ ß à á â ã ä å æ
    ç è é ê ë ì í î ï ð ñ ò ó ô õ ö ÷ ø ù ú û ü ý þ ÿ

Yes and again, also resent in plain text, and given correctly on all
receiving stations, if setted up for utf8!

This is my last mail within this matter, regardless how this e-mail should
be (mis)presented on the list.

Met echt-westfœlsken »Goutgaun!«

joachim
--
Kreimer-de Fries
Osnabrügge => Berlin-Pankow

Mac BacicTeX 2009 - TeXShop 2.29 / TeXworks 0.2.3
LyX 1.6.5 - MacBook Pro intel OSX 10.4.11 Tiger

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Technica

That was indeed a case of lack of attention, Joachim. Sorry about that.

I'll resend it in HTML.

I don't understand why the Reply to address doesn't work. I have
definitely specified it in the settings.

Reinhard/Ron
Seattle, USA

•

==============================END===================================

 * Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.

 * Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.

 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.

 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l")

   are to be sent to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or at

   http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.

*********************************************************************