Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding,
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Ed,
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much larger >> font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding,
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Maybe this helps :
https://askubuntu.com/questions/156645/thunderbird-font-size-varies-with-encoding-in-content-type-header
(DDG search : TBird 7bit encoding font size)
Regards,
Rudy Wieser
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte
Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
R.Wieser wrote:
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others. I've narrowed it down to 7bit
encoding,
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Maybe this helps :
https://askubuntu.com/questions/156645/thunderbird-font-size-varies-with-encoding-in-content-type-header
That might have been useful 12 years ago, Rudy, with Tbird 13.
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Ed
The User-Agent header in your articles is non-standard. You must be
inserting your own UA header that merely has "Mozilla Thunderbird".
Go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup (where you should have posted) to see lots of posts with the "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit" header. Do all those posts also look wrong sized, too?
The User-Agent header in your articles is non-standard.
That might have been useful 12 years ago, Rudy, with Tbird 13.
VanguardLH wrote:
The User-Agent header in your articles is non-standard. You must be
inserting your own UA header that merely has "Mozilla Thunderbird".
That is the standard User-Agent header for TB from v115 (and presumably onwards).
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
From your headers:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte
Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
But your own client, Thunderbird, per your configuration of it, is
adding the same header. It wouldn't be just Agent adding this header.
It also be for all similarly configured Tbird users.
Go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup (where you should have posted) to see lots of posts with the "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit" header. Do all those posts also look wrong sized, too?
On 10/13/2023 3:45 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
The User-Agent header in your articles is non-standard.
The designer-twits removed the version number.
To make it harder for us to help people.
VanguardLH wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
From your headers:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte
Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
But your own client, Thunderbird, per your configuration of it, is
adding the same header. It wouldn't be just Agent adding this header.
It also be for all similarly configured Tbird users.
Go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup (where you should have
posted) to see lots of posts with the "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit"
header. Do all those posts also look wrong sized, too?
That NG isn't on E-September or aioe.
I did find alt.comp.software.easter-eggs, though.
Don't waste my time with misdirections.
VanguardLH wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
From your headers:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte
Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
But your own client, Thunderbird, per your configuration of it, is
adding the same header. It wouldn't be just Agent adding this header.
It also be for all similarly configured Tbird users.
Go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup (where you should have posted) to see lots of posts with the "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit" header. Do all those posts also look wrong sized, too?
That NG isn't on E-September or aioe.
I did find alt.comp.software.easter-eggs, though.
Don't waste my time with misdirections.
R.Wieser wrote:
Ed,
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger
font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding,
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Maybe this helps :
https://askubuntu.com/questions/156645/thunderbird-font-size-varies-with-encoding-in-content-type-header
(DDG search : TBird 7bit encoding font size)
Regards,
Rudy Wieser
That might have been useful 12 years ago, Rudy, with Tbird 13.
That NG isn't on E-September
or aioe.
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Can you post a message-id of a posting with this problem (and of one without it)?
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Can you post a message-id of a posting with this problem (and of one without it)?
Now, that seems a more rational approach, Frank. I'll gladly follow that.
I've looked at all the messages in this thread right down to your
latest, to which I'm replying. They're all ok except the three from VanguardLH.
See you,
VanguardLH wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
From your headers:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte
Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
But your own client, Thunderbird, per your configuration of it, is
adding the same header. It wouldn't be just Agent adding this header.
It also be for all similarly configured Tbird users.
Go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup (where you should have
posted) to see lots of posts with the "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit"
header. Do all those posts also look wrong sized, too?
That NG isn't on E-September or aioe.
I did find alt.comp.software.easter-eggs, though.
Don't waste my time with misdirections.
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much >>>>>> larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Can you post a message-id of a posting with this problem (and of one >>> without it)?
Now, that seems a more rational approach, Frank. I'll gladly follow that.
I've looked at all the messages in this thread right down to your
latest, to which I'm replying. They're all ok except the three from
VanguardLH.
See you,
All look fine to me. But I've set fixed width ('Monospace:') font
(because using proportional spacing is silly on a plain text medium).
N.B. I'm using a (frozen) stone age version of Thunderbird (60.9.0),
so that might/will matter as well.
I don't see anything special in the (Message Source of) VanguardLH's postings. He has indeed a 'Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit' header, but
so have some others, for example Andy Burns and Paul (but they have
different 'Content-Type:' headers (than VanguardLH)).
Perhaps your Thunderbird gets confused by VanguardLH's unneeded [1]
(see my post) but (AFAICT) correct Content-* headers?
[1] "us-ascii" and "7bit" are defaults.
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
From your headers:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
But your own client, Thunderbird, per your configuration of it, is
adding the same header. It wouldn't be just Agent adding this header.
It also be for all similarly configured Tbird users.
Go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup (where you should have >>> posted) to see lots of posts with the "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit"
header. Do all those posts also look wrong sized, too?
That NG isn't on E-September or aioe.
I did find alt.comp.software.easter-eggs, though.
Don't waste my time with misdirections.
If a newsgroup doesn't show up that others mention, refresh the
newsgroups list in your NNTP client. Have you tried that yet?
And, yes, alt.comp.software.thunderbird does exist on ES. I also have
an account at ES although it is my backup Usenet provider. My primary
is individual.net. That newsgroup shows on both servers.
AIOE has been dead for a long time, so don't recite that Usenet provider
as to what and what not it has. AIOE has nothing anymore. It's dead.
That you mention AIOE not having a newsgroup when AIOE has been dead for
many months shows you haven't kept up with the news here. The death of
AIOE has been discussed in Usenet. As I recall, inquiries started
showing up around Jan 2023 about AIOE being dead.
Before lambasting someone, especially someone trying to help, check your facts first. For ES, refresh the groups list in Tbird. Do so for any
other NNTP servers to which your Tbird connect. However, delete the
AIOE server in Tbird since AIOE went dead many months ago.
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Can you post a message-id of a posting with this problem (and of one
without it)?
Now, that seems a more rational approach, Frank. I'll gladly follow that.
I've looked at all the messages in this thread right down to your
latest, to which I'm replying. They're all ok except the three from VanguardLH.
VanguardLH wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
From your headers:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much
larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
But your own client, Thunderbird, per your configuration of it, is
adding the same header. It wouldn't be just Agent adding this header. >>>> It also be for all similarly configured Tbird users.
Go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup (where you should have >>>> posted) to see lots of posts with the "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit" >>>> header. Do all those posts also look wrong sized, too?
That NG isn't on E-September or aioe.
I did find alt.comp.software.easter-eggs, though.
Don't waste my time with misdirections.
If a newsgroup doesn't show up that others mention, refresh the
newsgroups list in your NNTP client. Have you tried that yet?
And, yes, alt.comp.software.thunderbird does exist on ES. I also have
an account at ES although it is my backup Usenet provider. My primary
is individual.net. That newsgroup shows on both servers.
AIOE has been dead for a long time, so don't recite that Usenet provider
as to what and what not it has. AIOE has nothing anymore. It's dead.
That you mention AIOE not having a newsgroup when AIOE has been dead for
many months shows you haven't kept up with the news here. The death of
AIOE has been discussed in Usenet. As I recall, inquiries started
showing up around Jan 2023 about AIOE being dead.
Before lambasting someone, especially someone trying to help, check your
facts first. For ES, refresh the groups list in Tbird. Do so for any
other NNTP servers to which your Tbird connect. However, delete the
AIOE server in Tbird since AIOE went dead many months ago.
I'm well aware of aieo's demise, I have been for weeks. But the
news-server is still installed on one of my backup PCs, and I can survey
the last group list there.
Now, did you think of that before you jumped to your hasty conclusions
based on flimsy evidence? And before you rushed in with your arrogant, overweening piece of dialogue?
Ed
I my client, the list of fallback character sets (for writing) is:
us-ascii iso-8859-* (16 entries where * is 0 to 16) utf-8 utf-7 gb2312
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much >>>>>> larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Can you post a message-id of a posting with this problem (and of one >>> without it)?
Now, that seems a more rational approach, Frank. I'll gladly follow that.
I've looked at all the messages in this thread right down to your
latest, to which I'm replying. They're all ok except the three from
VanguardLH.
From the headers of their posts in this thread:
VanguardLH (40tude Dialog)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Frank (tin)
Content-Type header is absent.
Content-Transfer-Encoding header is absent.
Ed Cryer (Thunderbird)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andy (Thunderbird)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Paul (Ratcatcher, perhaps bogus UA string)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Carlos (Thunderbird)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Am I, VanguardLH, the only one that incites the font size problem in
your setup of Thunderbird? I cannot see how some posters using the same "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit" header cause a font sizing problem for
you, but other posters also using that same header that do not cause a
font sizing problem, could be caused by posters using the same header.
It's there: a font size problem. It's not there: no font size problem.
What is different, if it is just my posts that cause the font sizing
problem for you, is the Content-Type header. My client declares it uses plain text (ASCII), and nothing fancier (that was added later), like
UTF-8. The other posters' clients declare using UTF-8. I don't need to
use UTF-8, because I never use characters outside the ASCII-7 character
set.
I my client, the list of fallback character sets (for writing) is:
us-ascii
iso-8859-* (16 entries where * is 0 to 16)
utf-8
utf-7
gb2312
They default in the order listed, top down. Default charsets for
reading are different, but my fallback reading charset list could be different than what Thunderbird uses. Every NNTP client should support
the ASCII charset, especially since the others are extensions of ASCII.
When I write an article as the originator, it will use ASCII. If I
reply to someone that used non-ASCII characters, and those are in the
quoted section of my reply, then my client has to fallback to a charset
that supports those non-ASCII characters. That a client uses, say,
UTF-8 does not mandate there are non-ASCII characters in the article.
So, if I reply to someone using UTF-8, and quote part of their article,
but that part does not employ non-ASCII characters, then my client will
use ASCII.
Odd Thunderbird cannot handle posts that are solely ASCII. Or doesn't
have the same font sizing problem with posts from users that don't
declare those headers, like Frank. UTF-8 extends ASCII. Before adding support for any other charsets, ASCII should be the first one supported.
Am I the only poster the only one that causes the font sizing problem
for you? When you started your thread, you didn't mention specific
posters, but just claimed the Content-Transfer-Encoding header was the culprit despite you add it, and so several other posters you say their articles don't cause the problem. My guess it is the charset specified
in the Content-Type header, but a single instance (just me) is not
sufficient proof. Who ELSE causes font sizing problems in your Tbird?
VanguardLH wrote:
I my client, the list of fallback character sets (for writing) is:
us-ascii iso-8859-* (16 entries where * is 0 to 16) utf-8 utf-7 gb2312
Over the years, there are two character encodings that I've noticed
trigger thunderbird to use a noticeably different font, big5 (chinese)
and koi8 (russian) i haven't seen any of those in this thread.
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much >>>>>>> larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>>>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Can you post a message-id of a posting with this problem (and of one >>>> without it)?
Now, that seems a more rational approach, Frank. I'll gladly follow that. >>>
I've looked at all the messages in this thread right down to your
latest, to which I'm replying. They're all ok except the three from
VanguardLH.
See you,
All look fine to me. But I've set fixed width ('Monospace:') font
(because using proportional spacing is silly on a plain text medium).
N.B. I'm using a (frozen) stone age version of Thunderbird (60.9.0),
so that might/will matter as well.
I don't see anything special in the (Message Source of) VanguardLH's
postings. He has indeed a 'Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit' header, but
so have some others, for example Andy Burns and Paul (but they have
different 'Content-Type:' headers (than VanguardLH)).
Perhaps your Thunderbird gets confused by VanguardLH's unneeded [1]
(see my post) but (AFAICT) correct Content-* headers?
[1] "us-ascii" and "7bit" are defaults.
All was ok with TB102. This problem arrived with 115.
My current suspect is "us-ascii".
I've tried all the 115 display settings, to no avail.
Ed
I can see perhaps the need for
more space with Chinese characters that are pictograms/logograms.
I don't see why ASCII representation would take more space than UTF-8, especially since UTF-8 is an extension of ASCII (for presentation or rendering, not for encoding).
I feel very sceptical about this new Thunderbird.
Thunderbird Supernova, they call it. They're on 15.3.2 already after so
short a time.
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much >>>>>> larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte >>>>>> Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Can you post a message-id of a posting with this problem (and of one >>> without it)?
Now, that seems a more rational approach, Frank. I'll gladly follow that.
I've looked at all the messages in this thread right down to your
latest, to which I'm replying. They're all ok except the three from
VanguardLH.
From the headers of their posts in this thread:
VanguardLH (40tude Dialog)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Frank (tin)
Content-Type header is absent.
Content-Transfer-Encoding header is absent.
Ed Cryer (Thunderbird)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andy (Thunderbird)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Paul (Ratcatcher, perhaps bogus UA string)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Carlos (Thunderbird)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Am I, VanguardLH, the only one that incites the font size problem in
your setup of Thunderbird? I cannot see how some posters using the same "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit" header cause a font sizing problem for
you, but other posters also using that same header that do not cause a
font sizing problem, could be caused by posters using the same header.
It's there: a font size problem. It's not there: no font size problem.
What is different, if it is just my posts that cause the font sizing
problem for you, is the Content-Type header. My client declares it uses plain text (ASCII), and nothing fancier (that was added later), like
UTF-8. The other posters' clients declare using UTF-8. I don't need to
use UTF-8, because I never use characters outside the ASCII-7 character
set.
VanguardLH wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
Go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird
That NG isn't on E-September or aioe.
I did find alt.comp.software.easter-eggs, though.
Don't waste my time with misdirections.
Ed
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
The User-Agent header in your articles is non-standard. You must be
inserting your own UA header that merely has "Mozilla Thunderbird".
That is the standard User-Agent header for TB from v115 (and presumably
onwards).
Then a poor choice by Mozilla. It does not properly identify the user
agent. They might've as well as have used "An email & newsreader
client". The 2nd referenced article notes the v155 of Tbird is using:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/115.x.y;
They list similar UA strings going back to Tbird 102. Can't get farther
back without buying their UA database which isn't going to happen.
Thanks for the update, though. One source says Tbird's UA is the long string, another says the vague short string. I doubt many Tbird users
bother with, or even know about, the UA header, and don't delve into the config editor to change general.useragent.override. Some more might use add-ons to change the UA string, but those would be a small percent.
Many posters neglect to give specifics, like the version of whatever OS
or program/app they are asking about. Not always correct to assume they
are using the latest version. The UA header helps when that info is
absent from their posts. Besides the Tbird version, the UA also helps identify under what OS they are using Tbird since Tbird is multi
platform. In fact, some users refuse to give that info when requested because they think it is irrelevant, but don't really know. The micky
poster is like that. So getting it when omitted or refused can help
focus the responses.
Changing to the short uninformative UA string isn't going to help with fingerprinting for a long time. It identifies someone using 115, or
later, of Tbird versus earlier versions. If fingerprinting was the
issue, Mozilla should have defaulted to not adding the UA header at all
to hide Tbird users along with all other users of clients that also
don't report or were configured not to report a UA header.
Apparently there are 2 UA settings (besides the override already
mentioned):
old one: mailnews.headers.sendUserAgent
new one: mailnews.headers.useMinimalUserAgent
For the new one, the default is True, which means, yep, we get the short
and rather useless UA string for Tbird 115+. The first one was there
before, and decided whether or not to even included the UA header, or
not; however, if the override setting was left blank, the effect was the same, so unclear why 2 settings are needed to omit the UA header. Since
the override setting has been there for, well, perhaps forever then why wouldn't users concerned with hiding their OS and Tbird version have set
the override setting to empty, or to some vague string? We get another option that overlaps another option. And both require the user to delve
into the config editor to define. Stupid.
Instead of add the useMinimalUserAgent setting, Mozilla could've just
change the default value of the UA header by setting the override
setting to "Mozilla Thunderbird". Just reuse a setting already there.
Adding more settings that effect the same result just confuses users,
and makes a mess of configuring the UA string. It also means add-on
authors have to account for more than just the override setting. More
work for no real gain.
"Implement configuration to send a minimal User-Agent header, or no
header at all, in sent emails" https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1114475
On 10/14/2023 5:14 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
The User-Agent header in your articles is non-standard. You must be
inserting your own UA header that merely has "Mozilla Thunderbird".
That is the standard User-Agent header for TB from v115 (and presumably
onwards).
Then a poor choice by Mozilla. It does not properly identify the user
agent. They might've as well as have used "An email & newsreader
client". The 2nd referenced article notes the v155 of Tbird is using:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/115.x.y;
They list similar UA strings going back to Tbird 102. Can't get farther
back without buying their UA database which isn't going to happen.
Thanks for the update, though. One source says Tbird's UA is the long
string, another says the vague short string. I doubt many Tbird users
bother with, or even know about, the UA header, and don't delve into the
config editor to change general.useragent.override. Some more might use
add-ons to change the UA string, but those would be a small percent.
Many posters neglect to give specifics, like the version of whatever OS
or program/app they are asking about. Not always correct to assume they
are using the latest version. The UA header helps when that info is
absent from their posts. Besides the Tbird version, the UA also helps
identify under what OS they are using Tbird since Tbird is multi
platform. In fact, some users refuse to give that info when requested
because they think it is irrelevant, but don't really know. The micky
poster is like that. So getting it when omitted or refused can help
focus the responses.
Changing to the short uninformative UA string isn't going to help with
fingerprinting for a long time. It identifies someone using 115, or
later, of Tbird versus earlier versions. If fingerprinting was the
issue, Mozilla should have defaulted to not adding the UA header at all
to hide Tbird users along with all other users of clients that also
don't report or were configured not to report a UA header.
Apparently there are 2 UA settings (besides the override already
mentioned):
old one: mailnews.headers.sendUserAgent
new one: mailnews.headers.useMinimalUserAgent
For the new one, the default is True, which means, yep, we get the short
and rather useless UA string for Tbird 115+. The first one was there
before, and decided whether or not to even included the UA header, or
not; however, if the override setting was left blank, the effect was the
same, so unclear why 2 settings are needed to omit the UA header. Since
the override setting has been there for, well, perhaps forever then why
wouldn't users concerned with hiding their OS and Tbird version have set
the override setting to empty, or to some vague string? We get another
option that overlaps another option. And both require the user to delve
into the config editor to define. Stupid.
Instead of add the useMinimalUserAgent setting, Mozilla could've just
change the default value of the UA header by setting the override
setting to "Mozilla Thunderbird". Just reuse a setting already there.
Adding more settings that effect the same result just confuses users,
and makes a mess of configuring the UA string. It also means add-on
authors have to account for more than just the override setting. More
work for no real gain.
"Implement configuration to send a minimal User-Agent header, or no
header at all, in sent emails"
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1114475
Have you tested "general.useragent.override" ?
VanguardLH wrote:
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters outside the
ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “”«»— …
I feel very sceptical about this new Thunderbird.
Thunderbird Supernova, they call it. They're on 15.3.2 already after so
short a time.
TB went from 102 to this 115 Supernova, and it has all the hallmarks of
"done for show".
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters outside the
ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “”«»— …
Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those
non-ASCII7 characters.
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters outside the
ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “”«»— …
Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those
non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters outside the >>>>> ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “”«»— …
Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those
non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Maybe you were trying to be tricky, but I noticed the non-ASCII
characters in your post, and wanted to check how my client would handle
them. I deliberately included your non-ASCII characters in the quoted portion of my reply to test which encoding method got employed. As a
result, my headers changed from:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
to:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by switching
to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I
had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just used
the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed
with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8 whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts.
VanguardLH wrote:[...]
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed
with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8 whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts.
Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you for having taken the trouble to adapt.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
' added in case Thunderbird does even more strange things.]
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters outside the >>>>>> ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “”«»— … >>>>
non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Maybe you were trying to be tricky, but I noticed the non-ASCII
characters in your post, and wanted to check how my client would handle
them. I deliberately included your non-ASCII characters in the quoted
portion of my reply to test which encoding method got employed. As a
result, my headers changed from:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
to:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by switching
to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I
had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just used
the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed
with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8
whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts.
Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you for having taken the trouble to adapt.
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:[...]
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed
with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8
whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts.
Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you for
having taken the trouble to adapt.
What about this/my response?
If the theory is correct, this response would show in a large font on
your system.
I.e. I - a previously Good Poster TM - has intentionally 'messed up'
this post by manually [1] adding the 'bad'/unneeded headers:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
' added in case Thunderbird does even more strange things.]
[1] Hoping this doesn't confuse *my* newsreader!
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-10-15 20:14, Ed Cryer wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters
outside the
ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “”«»— … >>>>>>
non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Maybe you were trying to be tricky, but I noticed the non-ASCII
characters in your post, and wanted to check how my client would handle >>>> them. I deliberately included your non-ASCII characters in the quoted >>>> portion of my reply to test which encoding method got employed. As a >>>> result, my headers changed from:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
to:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by
switching
to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I >>>> had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just used >>>> the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed
with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8 >>>> whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts. >>>
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you
for having taken the trouble to adapt.
You misunderstood completely.
YOU have to adapt. The problem for you is not solved, and only you can
solve it.
Me and millions of other Tbird users!
Are you seriously suggesting that we all change our settings individually?
Path: uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10
Subject: Re: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2023 21:49:28 +0200
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <kp2u29Fak91U2@mid.individual.net>
References: <ugc351$3bf96$1@dont-email.me> <1v39fwf0l1gvo$.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<uge5r9$3sffi$2@dont-email.me> <ugeell.nio.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
<uge8p9$3t5ag$1@dont-email.me> <1kbpixi9mo2kd.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<kp0bs2Fs3oqU1@mid.individual.net> <fgrot5zao7yu.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<kp0nfcFs3oqU4@mid.individual.net> <6zg0w4v5wgo6.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<ugha7h$kr8l$1@dont-email.me> <kp2rtoFak92U1@mid.individual.net>
<ughepb$m138$3@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net lxn7H1CnXrFtOQ/xUqrNgwtRicyyVJtNLEHo5xwPyR54gAoaib Cancel-Lock: sha1:Wh5Iy50wV15nnTUySsTvbFUN1oc= sha256:eWSXMhYwkPvV1zJqPRIySrnLl73xBdB5kCTzzAz4CY8=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <ughepb$m138$3@dont-email.me>
Xref: uni-berlin.de alt.comp.os.windows-10:177231
On 2023-10-15 21:31, Ed Cryer wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-10-15 20:14, Ed Cryer wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters
outside the
ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “â€Â«Â»â€” …
Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those >>>>>>> non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Maybe you were trying to be tricky, but I noticed the non-ASCII
characters in your post, and wanted to check how my client would handle >>>>> them. I deliberately included your non-ASCII characters in the quoted >>>>> portion of my reply to test which encoding method got employed. As a >>>>> result, my headers changed from:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
to:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by
switching
to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I
had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just used >>>>> the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed >>>>> with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8
whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts. >>>>
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you
for having taken the trouble to adapt.
You misunderstood completely.
YOU have to adapt. The problem for you is not solved, and only you can
solve it.
Me and millions of other Tbird users!
Are you seriously suggesting that we all change our settings individually?
Yes.
You can, of course, go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup
and ask there. Maybe there is a bugzilla on it.
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-10-15 21:31, Ed Cryer wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-10-15 20:14, Ed Cryer wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters
outside the
ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “”«»— …
Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those >>>>>>>> non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Maybe you were trying to be tricky, but I noticed the non-ASCII
characters in your post, and wanted to check how my client would
handle
them. I deliberately included your non-ASCII characters in the quoted >>>>>> portion of my reply to test which encoding method got employed. As a >>>>>> result, my headers changed from:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
to:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by
switching
to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I >>>>>> had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just >>>>>> used
the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed >>>>>> with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use >>>>>> UTF-8
whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their
posts.
Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you >>>>> for having taken the trouble to adapt.
You misunderstood completely.
YOU have to adapt. The problem for you is not solved, and only you
can solve it.
Me and millions of other Tbird users!
Are you seriously suggesting that we all change our settings
individually?
Yes.
You can, of course, go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup
and ask there. Maybe there is a bugzilla on it.
I have my own personal "bugzilla", pal.
In Tbird 102 all messages display ok in the message pane. And that
includes all those from Vanguard. I can't find a one that doesn't
display ok.
And then in Tbird 115 the problem suddenly arises; no change made by me.
Now then, engage brain! If it's happened here, where else will it have happened amongst the 20+ million Tbird users?
And thank me for promoting their cause, when people like you militate
against it.
Ed
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters outside the >>>>>> ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “”«»— … >>>>
non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Maybe you were trying to be tricky, but I noticed the non-ASCII
characters in your post, and wanted to check how my client would handle
them. I deliberately included your non-ASCII characters in the quoted
portion of my reply to test which encoding method got employed. As a
result, my headers changed from:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
to:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by switching
to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I
had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just used
the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed
with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8
whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts.
Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you for having taken the trouble to adapt.
Ed
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by switching >>> to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I
had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just used
the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed
with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8
whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts.
Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you for
having taken the trouble to adapt.
Ed
My filters kill (marked ignored, use Hide Ignored by default) any post
that uses base 64 encoding, and now you're using that. Why? Base 64 encoding is used for attachments (whether inline or attached). This is
a text-only newsgroup. Use base 64 in binary newsgroups, like images or videos, but generally don't use base 64 in Usenet. Other than in binary newsgroups, base 64 posts are used by spammers to avoid filtering at the servers. ES is updating their filters to eradicate base 64 posts. Not
all Usenet providers kill binary posts in text newsgroups. I do.
Your configuration on Tbird is okay with UTF-8 posts. Mine was UTF-8
only because I deliberately replied to Carlos post which had a non-ASCII character, so my client had to fallback to an encoding that would cover
those non-ASCII characters. When I start a thread, or reply to a post
(and include the parent post's content), I will continue to use ASCII.
The problem is with Tbird not using the correct font to show ASCII
posts. All NNTP clients must support ASCII. UTF-8 is an extension to
ASCII.
So, you still have a problem with your instance of Thunderbird showing
the wrong font size for ASCII posts. As I recall, someone said to
review the font settings in Tbird. Perhaps the one you picked for text
is larger than others.
I will not change to using UTF-8 as my default encoding. *I* (not all others) only use ASCII characters. If I quote a parent post which has non-ASCII characters, my client only switches to UTF-8 if I don't trim
the quoted content to get rid of the non-ASCII characters. This time, I deliberately left Carlos' non-ASCII characters to test my client.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Path: uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10
Subject: Re: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2023 21:49:28 +0200
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <kp2u29Fak91U2@mid.individual.net>
References: <ugc351$3bf96$1@dont-email.me> <1v39fwf0l1gvo$.dlg@v.nguard.lh> >> <uge5r9$3sffi$2@dont-email.me> <ugeell.nio.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
<uge8p9$3t5ag$1@dont-email.me> <1kbpixi9mo2kd.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<kp0bs2Fs3oqU1@mid.individual.net> <fgrot5zao7yu.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<kp0nfcFs3oqU4@mid.individual.net> <6zg0w4v5wgo6.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<ugha7h$kr8l$1@dont-email.me> <kp2rtoFak92U1@mid.individual.net>
<ughepb$m138$3@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net lxn7H1CnXrFtOQ/xUqrNgwtRicyyVJtNLEHo5xwPyR54gAoaib >> Cancel-Lock: sha1:Wh5Iy50wV15nnTUySsTvbFUN1oc= sha256:eWSXMhYwkPvV1zJqPRIySrnLl73xBdB5kCTzzAz4CY8=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <ughepb$m138$3@dont-email.me>
Xref: uni-berlin.de alt.comp.os.windows-10:177231
On 2023-10-15 21:31, Ed Cryer wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:Yes.
On 2023-10-15 20:14, Ed Cryer wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters
outside the
ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “â€Â«Â»â€” …
Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those >>>>>>>> non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Maybe you were trying to be tricky, but I noticed the non-ASCII
characters in your post, and wanted to check how my client would handle >>>>>> them. I deliberately included your non-ASCII characters in the quoted
portion of my reply to test which encoding method got employed. As a >>>>>> result, my headers changed from:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
to:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by
switching
to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I
had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just used >>>>>> the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed >>>>>> with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8
whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts. >>>>>
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you >>>>> for having taken the trouble to adapt.
You misunderstood completely.
YOU have to adapt. The problem for you is not solved, and only you can >>>> solve it.
Me and millions of other Tbird users!
Are you seriously suggesting that we all change our settings individually? >>
You can, of course, go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup
and ask there. Maybe there is a bugzilla on it.
He is also using base 64 encoding which is an encoding to cover binary content. This is a text-only newsgoup. No attachments. No binaries.
Ed should *not* be using base 64 except in binary newsgroups to convey attachments for photos, videos, executables (bad bad bad), or other
binary content. NOT HERE!
I filter out base 64 posts. I wouldn't have seen his except I am
currently only coloring the violations, but will soon be flagging them
as ignored (and my default view is to hide ignored messages, and their subthreads).
I will not change to using UTF-8 as my default encoding. I (not all
others) only use ASCII characters.
VanguardLH wrote:
He is also using base 64 encoding which is an encoding to cover
binary content. This is a text-only newsgoup. No attachments. No
binaries. Ed should *not* be using base 64 except in binary
newsgroups to convey attachments for photos, videos, executables
(bad bad bad), or other binary content. NOT HERE!
I filter out base 64 posts. I wouldn't have seen his except I am
currently only coloring the violations, but will soon be flagging
them as ignored (and my default view is to hide ignored messages,
and their subthreads).
I have no idea when Thunderbird switches to base64 or how to control it.
I know that some of my emails have done that, but not me. I didn't tell
Th to do that, AFAIK. I have no idea if he knows.
Or could wait until Tbird 116 to see if the rendering bug is resolved.
VanguardLH wrote:
Or could wait until Tbird 116 to see if the rendering bug is resolved.
There isn't (and won't ever be) a release v116 of TB.
Although I've heard talk that MZLA developers just might switch to
monthly releases, so that would change everything.
After ESR 115, the next ESR version is 128 in 2024 (Aug 5 for nightly,
Sep 2 for beta, Oct 1 for release).
A bit long to wait for a bug fix (if
ever reported) on a font size discrepancy of viewing ASCII posts.
When viewing my posts using us-ascii in your instance of TBird, does
font size get larger? Do you suffer Ed's issue with my posts?
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
Or could wait until Tbird 116 to see if the rendering bug is resolved.
There isn't (and won't ever be) a release v116 of TB.
I forgot the Tbird group syncs on ESR releases of Firefox. Amend my statement to:
Or you could wait until the next ESR release of Thunderbird.
https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=Release_Management/Calendar
After ESR 115, the next ESR version is 128 in 2024 (Aug 5 for nightly,
Sep 2 for beta, Oct 1 for release).
A bit long to wait for a bug fix (if ever reported) on a font size discrepancy of viewing ASCII posts.
You're using Thunderbird. Do my us-ascii posts have a font sizing issue
for you, too?
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Path: uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10
Subject: Re: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2023 21:49:28 +0200
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <kp2u29Fak91U2@mid.individual.net>
References: <ugc351$3bf96$1@dont-email.me> <1v39fwf0l1gvo$.dlg@v.nguard.lh> >> <uge5r9$3sffi$2@dont-email.me> <ugeell.nio.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> >> <uge8p9$3t5ag$1@dont-email.me> <1kbpixi9mo2kd.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<kp0bs2Fs3oqU1@mid.individual.net> <fgrot5zao7yu.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<kp0nfcFs3oqU4@mid.individual.net> <6zg0w4v5wgo6.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
<ugha7h$kr8l$1@dont-email.me> <kp2rtoFak92U1@mid.individual.net>
<ughepb$m138$3@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net lxn7H1CnXrFtOQ/xUqrNgwtRicyyVJtNLEHo5xwPyR54gAoaib >> Cancel-Lock: sha1:Wh5Iy50wV15nnTUySsTvbFUN1oc= sha256:eWSXMhYwkPvV1zJqPRIySrnLl73xBdB5kCTzzAz4CY8=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <ughepb$m138$3@dont-email.me>
Xref: uni-berlin.de alt.comp.os.windows-10:177231
On 2023-10-15 21:31, Ed Cryer wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:Yes.
On 2023-10-15 20:14, Ed Cryer wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:Well done, man. Your posts now appear normal size.
On 2023-10-15 00:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
I don't need to use UTF-8, because I never use characters
outside the
ASCII-7 character set.
You do, when you reply to other posts that use them. “â€Â«Â»â€” …
Which I mentioned, but only if the quoted content includes those >>>>>>>> non-ASCII7 characters.
Which my post contained, and now your post has:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Maybe you were trying to be tricky, but I noticed the non-ASCII
characters in your post, and wanted to check how my client would handle >>>>>> them. I deliberately included your non-ASCII characters in the quoted
portion of my reply to test which encoding method got employed. As a >>>>>> result, my headers changed from:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
to:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
My client adapted to the need of supporting more than ASCII by
switching
to UTF-8. That's why my client has a list of fallback charsets. If I
had trimmed out your non-ASCII characters, my client would've just used >>>>>> the us-ascii charset.
Be interesting to know if the font sizing problem still exists for Ed >>>>>> with my reply to you that uses UTF-8. Other posters' clients use UTF-8
whether or not it is needed to encompass the characters in their posts. >>>>>
I feel more inclined to blame Mozilla for all this; and to thank you >>>>> for having taken the trouble to adapt.
You misunderstood completely.
YOU have to adapt. The problem for you is not solved, and only you can >>>> solve it.
Me and millions of other Tbird users!
Are you seriously suggesting that we all change our settings individually? >>
You can, of course, go to the alt.comp.software.thunderbird newsgroup
and ask there. Maybe there is a bugzilla on it.
He is also using base 64 encoding which is an encoding to cover binary content. This is a text-only newsgoup. No attachments. No binaries.
Ed should *not* be using base 64 except in binary newsgroups to convey attachments for photos, videos, executables (bad bad bad), or other
binary content. NOT HERE!
I filter out base 64 posts. I wouldn't have seen his except I am
currently only coloring the violations, but will soon be flagging them
as ignored (and my default view is to hide ignored messages, and their subthreads).
While I use Lucida Console which is a TrueType font, it is monospaced.
It is a sans serif font, and easy on my eyes. I don't have Monospace
from which to select
On 2023-10-16 04:27, VanguardLH wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
Or could wait until Tbird 116 to see if the rendering bug is resolved.
There isn't (and won't ever be) a release v116 of TB.
I forgot the Tbird group syncs on ESR releases of Firefox. Amend my
statement to:
Or you could wait until the next ESR release of Thunderbird.
https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=Release_Management/Calendar
After ESR 115, the next ESR version is 128 in 2024 (Aug 5 for nightly,
Sep 2 for beta, Oct 1 for release).
A bit long to wait for a bug fix (if ever reported) on a font size
discrepancy of viewing ASCII posts.
You're using Thunderbird. Do my us-ascii posts have a font sizing issue
for you, too?
I have not noticed any issue in this thread at least. But I am on Linux,
and using Thunderbird 115, of course.
I am just looking at one:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It displays correctly.
My font setting is Roboto 14 in general. In advanced, it is size 14 for latin, and 16 for "other writing system". I change to 14 for both.
Monospace was set to a smaller font, and I change that.
I don't detect an US-ascii language, if it is not "latin".
The issue I have in this laptop with Thunderbird fonts is that they
display too small and I have to use the '+' key.
I use Consoleas 14pt for my serif, san-serif and monospace fonts, and
don't allow messages to override them.
Andy Burns wrote:
I use Consoleas 14pt for my serif, san-serif and monospace fonts, and
don't allow messages to override them.
If I set 14pt for "Latin" and 17pt for "Other writing systems" then I
di see a difference between e.g. Carlos's and Vanguard's posts ...
Andy Burns wrote:
I use Consoleas 14pt for my serif, san-serif and monospace fonts, and
don't allow messages to override them.
If I set 14pt for "Latin" and 17pt for "Other writing systems" then I di
see a difference between e.g. Carlos's and Vanguard's posts ...
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
I use Consoleas 14pt for my serif, san-serif and monospace fonts, and
don't allow messages to override them.
If I set 14pt for "Latin" and 17pt for "Other writing systems" then I
di see a difference between e.g. Carlos's and Vanguard's posts ...
Ah, a superset definition of charsets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Latin_character_sets_(computing)
Perhaps ASCII isn't considered a Latin charset, so the "Other" font
fallback gets used. The Latin alphabet is pretty old, and includes lots
of non-ASCII characters. ASCII showed up in the '60s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_alphabet
I remember the old teletype consoles that punched holes in tape or cards (http://www.it.uu.se/education/course/homepage/os/vt18/images/module-0/linux/shell-and-terminal/teletype-model-33.jpg)
that you handed to the computer guys to run your program, and later
you'd return to get a printout, find an error, repunch some cards, or
repunch the entire tape, hand in again, get the printout, and repeat
until the program no longer failed. No non-ASCII characters on
teletypes.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-16 04:27, VanguardLH wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
Or could wait until Tbird 116 to see if the rendering bug is resolved. >>>>There isn't (and won't ever be) a release v116 of TB.
I forgot the Tbird group syncs on ESR releases of Firefox. Amend my
statement to:
Or you could wait until the next ESR release of Thunderbird.
https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=Release_Management/Calendar
After ESR 115, the next ESR version is 128 in 2024 (Aug 5 for nightly,
Sep 2 for beta, Oct 1 for release).
A bit long to wait for a bug fix (if ever reported) on a font size
discrepancy of viewing ASCII posts.
You're using Thunderbird. Do my us-ascii posts have a font sizing issue >>> for you, too?
I have not noticed any issue in this thread at least. But I am on Linux,
and using Thunderbird 115, of course.
I am just looking at one:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It displays correctly.
My font setting is Roboto 14 in general. In advanced, it is size 14 for
latin, and 16 for "other writing system". I change to 14 for both.
Monospace was set to a smaller font, and I change that.
I don't detect an US-ascii language, if it is not "latin".
The issue I have in this laptop with Thunderbird fonts is that they
display too small and I have to use the '+' key.
Yeah, I set to a monospaced font, because it's impossible to align
anything using proportional fonts. Varying widths fonts make it
impossible to align on columns, like when you are trying indent or
tabularize some content.
While I use Lucida Console which is a TrueType font, it is monospaced.
It is a sans serif font, and easy on my eyes. I don't have Monospace
from which to select, but perhaps that's a common Linux platform font.
Lucida Sans Typewrite is also TrueType and monospaced, as is Courier
New. While they are monospaced (non-proportional) fonts, they have
different attributes, like pitch, spacing, kerning, and, yep, height.
In additional, if using different fonts, the font size specified for
each could be different. If you use natively huge fonts, or large font sizes, a lot of text will get truncated, overlapped, or oversized for
the element in which it is contained. I use the same font (10 point)
for all displayed message content: bodies, bodies (monospaced), headers,
and newsgroup lists. I do have different fonts and sizes used for
elements of the newsreader (column names, toolbars, tabs, but any
message content is the same font and size wherever displayed.
I don't use my newsreader for e-mail. I use a separate e-mail client
for e-mail. With a combo client, like Thunderbird, picking different
fonts and sizes might be nice on the eyes for e-mail composing and
viewing, especially proportional fonts, but doesn't work well with a plain-text venue, like Usenet. If Ed sees oversized characters when
viewing us-ascii posts, one fix already mentioned is to use a different
font (preferrably a non-porportional one) and/or smaller font size. I'm
not sure any program can accomodate any size font or font size in a
graphical display having multiple components for different content, especially when multiple components are combined, like field names,
Subject, date, etc all inside a larger component (e.g., preview pane
header section). You have to pick what you like that still fits.
I don't have any issue in that direction with Thunderbird. I participate
on several mail lists which are plain text only, so monospace is a must.
I think there is a setting that tells Thunderbird to use monospace for
plain text.
Otherwise, I can post using html, and then set a paragraph to
"preformat" which seems to actually mean "code", and it goes to
monospace and no wrap.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]
I don't have any issue in that direction with Thunderbird. I participate
on several mail lists which are plain text only, so monospace is a must.
I think there is a setting that tells Thunderbird to use monospace for
plain text.
Yes, there is.
In my 'stone-age' (60.9.0) Thunderbird:
Tools -> Options -> 'Display' tab -> 'Formatting' sub-tab -> Fonts & Colors -> Advanced... -> (this gives the 'Fonts & Encodings' popup) ->
Font control -> tick 'Use fixed width font for plain text messages'
Otherwise, I can post using html, and then set a paragraph to
"preformat" which seems to actually mean "code", and it goes to
monospace and no wrap.
On 10/13/2023 2:43 PM, Ed Cryer wrote:
Occasionally a message displays in Tbird's message pane with a much larger font size than others.
I've narrowed it down to 7bit encoding, and the major culprit is Forte Agent.
There appears to be no setting to handle this.
Ed
I wrote a rant and erased it.
For TBird 115, its frantic user-edits of userchrome.css and prefs.js
are worthy of a rant.
Why are they releasing software, and having the user community
chase it around with broom and dustpan, and userchrome.css edits ?
Paul
Otherwise, I can post using html, and then set a paragraph to
"preformat" which seems to actually mean "code", and it goes to
monospace and no wrap.
On 2023-10-16 20:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]
I don't have any issue in that direction with Thunderbird. I participate >>> on several mail lists which are plain text only, so monospace is a must. >>> I think there is a setting that tells Thunderbird to use monospace for
plain text.
Yes, there is.
In my 'stone-age' (60.9.0) Thunderbird:
Tools -> Options -> 'Display' tab -> 'Formatting' sub-tab -> Fonts &
Colors -> Advanced... -> (this gives the 'Fonts & Encodings' popup) ->
Font control -> tick 'Use fixed width font for plain text messages'
Otherwise, I can post using html, and then set a paragraph to
"preformat" which seems to actually mean "code", and it goes to
monospace and no wrap.
The problem I'm having now is that the font while composing the reply is
too small, and I don't see the setting for it. I can do ctrl+, but it is tiring.
On 2023-10-16 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
I use Consoleas 14pt for my serif, san-serif and monospace fonts, and
don't allow messages to override them.
If I set 14pt for "Latin" and 17pt for "Other writing systems" then I di
see a difference between e.g. Carlos's and Vanguard's posts ...
I just set "monospace" to have the same size as proportional (normally
it is two numbers smaller), and now your post displays with a bigger
font. But then when composing (replying to you) it goes to a smaller
font again.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-16 14:03, Andy Burns wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
I use Consoleas 14pt for my serif, san-serif and monospace fonts, and
don't allow messages to override them.
If I set 14pt for "Latin" and 17pt for "Other writing systems" then I di >>> see a difference between e.g. Carlos's and Vanguard's posts ...
I just set "monospace" to have the same size as proportional (normally
it is two numbers smaller), and now your post displays with a bigger
font. But then when composing (replying to you) it goes to a smaller
font again.
So, if I read this correctly, using a proportional font can cause the
sizing problem. Proportional fonts and Usenet don't mix well. Okay in e-mails, but use non-proportional (fixed) font in Usenet. Fixed fonts probably have less spacing between lines than for proportional.
While kerning affects the spacing between characters, changing between
fixed and proportional fonts will show a change in vertical spacing (whitespace between lines).
I go into Wordpad (pick an editor of your choice that supports fonts),
and duplicate a long line many times, like 2 dozen. Select a line or
lines in the middle of the group of lines. Then start picking different fonts for the selected lines, but do not change font size (points).
What I see is the lines following those selected will move up or down. Different fonts want different heights, and why font size, say 12, is
not uniform in line height across all fonts because the whitespace
changes between lines.
I have no idea if Tbird allows users to define line height. In a web
page, you could use:
p {
font-size: 16px;
line height:150%; /* Equivalent to 24px */
}
(see https://fonts.google.com/knowledge/glossary/line_height_leading)
where the line height is a percents of the point size of the font. I
don't know if line height is an attribute defined within a font file,
but it can be affected by the application when rendering a font.
Looks like Tbird is changing line height between fix and proportional
fonts. Could be Tbird uses a bigger line height to make it easier to
read the header section of the preview pane, or in the header list pane.
I use a monospaced (fixed) font of 10 points for the entries in the folder/tree pane, header list pane (where the threads are shown), for
body in the preview pane, and the header block in the preview pane. For
the header block in the preview pane showing Subject, date, newsgroup,
etc, I don't get a font choice. Just whether monospaced is used or not,
but it looks like it uses one of the 10-point selections. For
composing, I reduce to 9-point. I don't remember why, but may 10-point
just looks too big (for the Lucida Console fixed font), or I don't want
as wide a window when composing a reply.
Looks like Tbird is changing line height between fix and proportional fonts.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-16 20:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]
I don't have any issue in that direction with Thunderbird. I participate >>>> on several mail lists which are plain text only, so monospace is a must. >>>> I think there is a setting that tells Thunderbird to use monospace for >>>> plain text.
Yes, there is.
In my 'stone-age' (60.9.0) Thunderbird:
Tools -> Options -> 'Display' tab -> 'Formatting' sub-tab -> Fonts & >>> Colors -> Advanced... -> (this gives the 'Fonts & Encodings' popup) ->
Font control -> tick 'Use fixed width font for plain text messages'
Otherwise, I can post using html, and then set a paragraph to
"preformat" which seems to actually mean "code", and it goes to
monospace and no wrap.
The problem I'm having now is that the font while composing the reply is
too small, and I don't see the setting for it. I can do ctrl+, but it is
tiring.
Hmm, just a guess, but maybe Tbird remembers the prior selected font
size when composing a message. Start writing a new message, to to
Options -> Format, select font.
VanguardLH wrote:
Looks like Tbird is changing line height between fix and proportional fonts.
Only because it allows setting a different point size for monospace and proportional.
If I set the same font and size for serif/san-serif/monospace, and do
that for latin and for "other writing systems" then everyone's messages
here look the same.
Since nobody is using html, I could probably just set the monospace font
and size for latin and for "other", then tick the "use monosace for
plain text" option.
Isn't it GoodGuy [...] that deliberately insults
Usenetiquette by posting HTML
On 2023-10-16 20:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]
I don't have any issue in that direction with Thunderbird. I participate >> on several mail lists which are plain text only, so monospace is a must. >> I think there is a setting that tells Thunderbird to use monospace for
plain text.
Yes, there is.
In my 'stone-age' (60.9.0) Thunderbird:
Tools -> Options -> 'Display' tab -> 'Formatting' sub-tab -> Fonts & Colors -> Advanced... -> (this gives the 'Fonts & Encodings' popup) ->
Font control -> tick 'Use fixed width font for plain text messages'
Otherwise, I can post using html, and then set a paragraph to
"preformat" which seems to actually mean "code", and it goes to
monospace and no wrap.
The problem I'm having now is that the font while composing the reply is
too small, and I don't see the setting for it. I can do ctrl+, but it is tiring.
There's a simple text for a good old rant here; something like this.
1. I had a very finely working Tbird. It did all I wanted with personal
email and NG surfing.
2. All of a sudden an update arrived and screwed lots of things up.
3. I contacted my favourite NG, expecting that there'd be lots of fellow sufferers, and that we'd work together on the problem.
4. I got replies from people who didn't use Tbird or who used antique versions; hardly any from people who'd updated.
5. I was advised to change my settings, install this or that add-on,
create a new profile.
And they loaded on my shoulders so much work to do
that I felt I'd be more profitably rewarded by writing a completely new newsreader. As if I had nothing better to do.
6. The situation is analogous to having a builder repair the porch. And
when you complain that you didn't want pink paint or the letter-box
seated diagonally or the doormat nailed to a hook on the wall, he tells
you to shop around.
Well, there you have it, an outline for a good rant. You can add a few f...ings and blindings as the mood takes you.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-16 20:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]
I don't have any issue in that direction with Thunderbird. I participate >>>> on several mail lists which are plain text only, so monospace is a must. >>>> I think there is a setting that tells Thunderbird to use monospace for >>>> plain text.
Yes, there is.
In my 'stone-age' (60.9.0) Thunderbird:
Tools -> Options -> 'Display' tab -> 'Formatting' sub-tab -> Fonts & >>> Colors -> Advanced... -> (this gives the 'Fonts & Encodings' popup) ->
Font control -> tick 'Use fixed width font for plain text messages'
Otherwise, I can post using html, and then set a paragraph to
"preformat" which seems to actually mean "code", and it goes to
monospace and no wrap.
The problem I'm having now is that the font while composing the reply is
too small, and I don't see the setting for it. I can do ctrl+, but it is
tiring.
I don't use Thunderbird for news, only for e-mail and - as I said -
use an old version.
Having said that, I see that the font (and size) for composing is the
same as defined in the above mentioned 'Advanced...' setting of the
'Display' tab, at least for the fixed width / monospace case.
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
[...]
There's a simple text for a good old rant here; something like this.
1. I had a very finely working Tbird. It did all I wanted with personal
email and NG surfing.
2. All of a sudden an update arrived and screwed lots of things up.
3. I contacted my favourite NG, expecting that there'd be lots of fellow
sufferers, and that we'd work together on the problem.
4. I got replies from people who didn't use Tbird or who used antique
versions; hardly any from people who'd updated.
You got several of the latter, but you ignored them.
5. I was advised to change my settings, install this or that add-on,
create a new profile.
I don't remember seeing anything about an add-on, but yes, you were advised to do the latter, because you were unwilling to do the first.
The concept is called 'troubleshooting'. Get used to it, or hire
somebody to do it for you.
And they loaded on my shoulders so much work to do
that I felt I'd be more profitably rewarded by writing a completely new
newsreader. As if I had nothing better to do.
More whining and whingeing, poor Ed.
6. The situation is analogous to having a builder repair the porch. And
when you complain that you didn't want pink paint or the letter-box
seated diagonally or the doormat nailed to a hook on the wall, he tells
you to shop around.
Sorry, but we don't remember giving you a quote, nor you signing an
order. Can you please repost it? Never mind in which font.
Well, there you have it, an outline for a good rant. You can add a few
f...ings and blindings as the mood takes you.
It was a rant alright, don't know about the "good" part.
Perhaps a little bit less whining, whingeing and ranting and a bit
more effort and action on your part?
And, in the unlikely case you actually want to put some effort in
solving this, have a look at the other responses not (directly)
addressed to you. I think your answer might well lie in those.
...
5. I was advised to change my settings, install this or that add-on,
create a new profile. And they loaded on my shoulders so much work to do
that I felt I'd be more profitably rewarded by writing a completely new newsreader.
As if I had nothing better to do.
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
...
5. I was advised to change my settings, install this or that add-on,
create a new profile. And they loaded on my shoulders so much work to do
that I felt I'd be more profitably rewarded by writing a completely new
newsreader.
If Thunderbird is not to your liking, there are plenty of other NNTP
clients from which to chose. I don't Tbird anymore. If reporting the
bug is outside your tolerance, try a different newsreader.
Forte Agent
Xnews
Seamonkey
Opera Mail
Xananews
40tude Dialog (my choice)
Claws Mail
OE Classic (rewrite of Outlook Express)
Pan
slrn (text-based)
XPN (requires Python to be cross-platform)
Microplanet Gravity
others may provide more recommendations
Tell us, as simply as you can, why 115 is better than 102.
I found out about BriskBard a few weeks ago.
Like SeaMonkey, a Web browser that offers Email client and Usenet
newsreader among other features.
I haven't tried it out myself because of a lack of any information about keyboard shortcuts.
When I contacted the author about it, he seemed willing to do something
about it.
https://www.briskbard.com/index.php?lang=en
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
...
5. I was advised to change my settings, install this or that add-on,
create a new profile. And they loaded on my shoulders so much work to do
that I felt I'd be more profitably rewarded by writing a completely new
newsreader.
If Thunderbird is not to your liking, there are plenty of other NNTP
clients from which to chose. I don't Tbird anymore. If reporting the
bug is outside your tolerance, try a different newsreader.
Forte Agent
Xnews
Seamonkey
Opera Mail
Xananews
40tude Dialog (my choice)
Claws Mail
OE Classic (rewrite of Outlook Express)
Pan
slrn (text-based)
XPN (requires Python to be cross-platform)
Microplanet Gravity
others may provide more recommendations
That's what I did when I got fed up with Tbird. Try something else. I
don't visit binary newsgroups, so no need to reconstruct binaries sliced apart into multiple posts; else, I'd look at Newsbin Pro, SABnzdb or
NZBGet, Newsbin, GrabIt, and probably more choices that I don't remember
now. I only needed a newsreader for text-only newsgroups.
My current choice, Dialog, kept getting discarded over several trials of newsreaders. Only when I decided to spend more than superficial
analysis, and delved into defining event, message, and custom scripts,
and being able to test on all headers instead of just overview headers,
and support of regex did Dialog jump ahead of the other candidates.
If you're disgusted with all the local NNTP client choices, there's
EasyNews (and, ugh, Google Groups which gets you filtered out by many Usenetizens; see http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/) for
web-based access to Usenet.
In the past, I've already ran into forums leeching from Usenet by using HTTP-to-NNTP gateways. I don't use non-hierachical/flat (no threading,
all posts at same level) web-based Usenet leech sites, so I have none to mention.
As if I had nothing better to do.
Knowing if a program or app is right for you requires time to test each candidate. Why did you settle on Thunderbird? For me, Thunderbird was
a candidate out of half a dozen candidates. The list got whittled down
when I found something critical was missing.
If you are unwilling to test candidates for your NNTP client, and
exercise them well enough to become familiar with them, then you get
whatever failings are in whatever was your choice. A lot of users used Outlook Express simply because it was there in Windows (as of IE3), not because they tried anything else or even know what the hell is Usenet.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-17 18:59, Frank Slootweg wrote:
I found the problem: I had used (maybe days ago) "[Ctrl][+]" in the
display window, so "[Ctrl][0]" corrected it. Now letters have the same
size as in the compose window.
The display window remembers the zoom level, but the compose window is
new each time and thus at default zoom or 0.
So now all is working nicely, except that I have to use a default size
of 16 (18 for mono), which is huge. For some reason TH is thinking I
have 14 years and can read comfortably such tiny sizes as they use for
fonts (quite smaller than the same fonts in other programs, it seems to me).
Hmmm!? Strange! As I wrote (in the snipped part), I use 'Monospace: Consolas Size: 14', which is large enough, nearly 3mm high for a tall character like 't' on my 15.6" laptop screen (1920x1080).
Which (fixed width / monospace) font do you use?
On 2023-10-17 18:59, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-16 20:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]
I don't have any issue in that direction with Thunderbird. I participate >>>> on several mail lists which are plain text only, so monospace is a must. >>>> I think there is a setting that tells Thunderbird to use monospace for >>>> plain text.
Yes, there is.
In my 'stone-age' (60.9.0) Thunderbird:
Tools -> Options -> 'Display' tab -> 'Formatting' sub-tab -> Fonts & >>> Colors -> Advanced... -> (this gives the 'Fonts & Encodings' popup) -> >>> Font control -> tick 'Use fixed width font for plain text messages'
Otherwise, I can post using html, and then set a paragraph to
"preformat" which seems to actually mean "code", and it goes to
monospace and no wrap.
The problem I'm having now is that the font while composing the reply is >> too small, and I don't see the setting for it. I can do ctrl+, but it is >> tiring.
I don't use Thunderbird for news, only for e-mail and - as I said -
use an old version.
Having said that, I see that the font (and size) for composing is the same as defined in the above mentioned 'Advanced...' setting of the 'Display' tab, at least for the fixed width / monospace case.
I found the problem: I had used (maybe days ago) "[Ctrl][+]" in the
display window, so "[Ctrl][0]" corrected it. Now letters have the same
size as in the compose window.
The display window remembers the zoom level, but the compose window is
new each time and thus at default zoom or 0.
So now all is working nicely, except that I have to use a default size
of 16 (18 for mono), which is huge. For some reason TH is thinking I
have 14 years and can read comfortably such tiny sizes as they use for
fonts (quite smaller than the same fonts in other programs, it seems to me).
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:
[...]
There's a simple text for a good old rant here; something like this.
1. I had a very finely working Tbird. It did all I wanted with personal
email and NG surfing.
2. All of a sudden an update arrived and screwed lots of things up.
3. I contacted my favourite NG, expecting that there'd be lots of fellow >> sufferers, and that we'd work together on the problem.
4. I got replies from people who didn't use Tbird or who used antique
versions; hardly any from people who'd updated.
You got several of the latter, but you ignored them.
5. I was advised to change my settings, install this or that add-on,
create a new profile.
I don't remember seeing anything about an add-on, but yes, you were advised to do the latter, because you were unwilling to do the first.
The concept is called 'troubleshooting'. Get used to it, or hire somebody to do it for you.
And they loaded on my shoulders so much work to do
that I felt I'd be more profitably rewarded by writing a completely new
newsreader. As if I had nothing better to do.
More whining and whingeing, poor Ed.
6. The situation is analogous to having a builder repair the porch. And
when you complain that you didn't want pink paint or the letter-box
seated diagonally or the doormat nailed to a hook on the wall, he tells
you to shop around.
Sorry, but we don't remember giving you a quote, nor you signing an order. Can you please repost it? Never mind in which font.
Well, there you have it, an outline for a good rant. You can add a few
f...ings and blindings as the mood takes you.
It was a rant alright, don't know about the "good" part.
Perhaps a little bit less whining, whingeing and ranting and a bit
more effort and action on your part?
And, in the unlikely case you actually want to put some effort in solving this, have a look at the other responses not (directly)
addressed to you. I think your answer might well lie in those.
Here's your chance to shine, Frank.
Tell us, as simply as you can, why 115 is better than 102.
I prefer to keep separate my e-mail and newsreader clients.
Too often
I've seen users post intimated to Usenet instead of e-mail they
intended. Ooops. Often all it takes is clicking on the wrong toolbar
button for the difference between send to e-mail and send to Usenet.
While my newsreader does support e-mail, I have nothing within it
configured to do e-mail. No e-mail servers defined. Yep, I have
clicked the wrong toolbar button (R for reply by e-mail instead of F for >follow up to newsgroup), but my client will fail on the send, because it
has no info on an SMTP server.
Typically the problem with the all-in-one choices is they are not >best-of-breed for any one of them. You get bloat for features you don't
want (for me, chat, RSS, FTP, media player).
There's also the issue of letters in outbox; 102 shows them, whereas 115
only shows them if you also enable "show all counts", which litters the
whole display.
On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 16:55:39 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
I prefer to keep separate my e-mail and newsreader clients.
So do I.
Too often
I've seen users post intimated to Usenet instead of e-mail they
intended. Ooops. Often all it takes is clicking on the wrong toolbar
button for the difference between send to e-mail and send to Usenet.
Yes.
While my newsreader does support e-mail, I have nothing within it
configured to do e-mail. No e-mail servers defined. Yep, I have
clicked the wrong toolbar button (R for reply by e-mail instead of F for
follow up to newsgroup), but my client will fail on the send, because it
has no info on an SMTP server.
Yes.
Typically the problem with the all-in-one choices is they are not
best-of-breed for any one of them. You get bloat for features you don't
want (for me, chat, RSS, FTP, media player).
That's exactly why I don't like any kind of combo software, not just newsreader/e-mail. I've probably said it here before, but I prefer WordPerfect to Microsoft Word, but Excel to Quattro Pro.
Often I generate text documents with spreadsheets inserted, so having
both in a combo is useful to me.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Often I generate text documents with spreadsheets inserted, so having
both in a combo is useful to me.
But a spreadsheet file would be an attachment to the Usenet message, and attachments aren't allowed in text-only newsgroups. Maybe they're
allowed over in an Excel newsgroup, though.
If you highlighted all the cells (rows and columns) in the spreadsheet,
and pasted into a Usenet message, and because we're talking about
text-only newsgroups, wouldn't the columnar formatting get all screwed
up, especially if using a proportional font, but probably even if using
a fixed font?
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Often I generate text documents with spreadsheets inserted, so having
both in a combo is useful to me.
But a spreadsheet file would be an attachment to the Usenet message, and
attachments aren't allowed in text-only newsgroups. Maybe they're
allowed over in an Excel newsgroup, though.
Where do you think I said anything about attaching files on Usenet?
If you highlighted all the cells (rows and columns) in the spreadsheet,
and pasted into a Usenet message, and because we're talking about
text-only newsgroups, wouldn't the columnar formatting get all screwed
up, especially if using a proportional font, but probably even if using
a fixed font?
It would work perfectly on html, and badly on plain text.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Often I generate text documents with spreadsheets inserted, so having
both in a combo is useful to me.
But a spreadsheet file would be an attachment to the Usenet message, and >>> attachments aren't allowed in text-only newsgroups. Maybe they're
allowed over in an Excel newsgroup, though.
Where do you think I said anything about attaching files on Usenet?
Um, because we were discussing problem with Usenet encodings in Tbird
which is a combo client. While Tbird is a combo client, I didn't
realize the subthread shifted to e-mail.
Why would a combo e-mail+newsgroups client be handy for inserting some spreadsheets in newsgroups? If the Usenet discussion about encoding
which wandered into using combo clients changed from Usenet to e-mail, I missed it.
Typically the problem with the all-in-one choices is they are not
best-of-breed for any one of them. You get bloat for features you don't
want (for me, chat, RSS, FTP, media player).
That's exactly why I don't like any kind of combo software, not just newsreader/e-mail. I've probably said it here before, but I prefer WordPerfect to Microsoft Word, but Excel to Quattro Pro.
If you highlighted all the cells (rows and columns) in the spreadsheet,
and pasted into a Usenet message, and because we're talking about
text-only newsgroups, wouldn't the columnar formatting get all screwed
up, especially if using a proportional font, but probably even if using
a fixed font?
It would work perfectly on html, and badly on plain text.
But HTML in plain-text newsgroups is a no-no.
Most times it is
superfluous for e-mail. However, for e-mails, formatting can be handy,
like tables in the body, or attaching inline an image. Plain text for
either e-mail or newsgroups is lousy for importing or pasting columnar
data, especially with proportional fonts. Best you could do with plain
text (e-mail or newsgroups) is attach the file.
"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
| > There's also the issue of letters in outbox; 102 shows them, whereas 115 | > only shows them if you also enable "show all counts", which litters the
| > whole display.
|
| I thought the Outbox was a local folder. If so, can you have Tbird show
| just the Local Folders folder?
I think what he's talking about is the number next to "Outbox"
that shows an email waiting to be sent, or shows unopened
message count in other folders.
I still don't understand all this hoopla. Why can't people just
go back to a version they like and add a policies.json file if
necessary to block updates? With a browser there's at least
some logic to the idea of getting ssecurity updates. But email?
What's really different between my v. 52 and v. 115 in terms of
actual functionality? Javascript should be blocked, so there's
little or no security issue. TLS is up to date in older versions.
So many people are still thinking like it's the 90s, looking
forward to the next software version because it will actually
have useful, new stuff. These days it usually doesn't. In fact,
most software developers no longer even list changes. I've never
had a problem with T52. I install the same on Win7 and Win10.
It's never crashed and it handles my extensions.
"Ed Cryer" <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote
|
| BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by making
| the profiles incompatible.
|
That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
but not from older TBird? Crazy.
I've been backing up those folders
for years now. For the record, unless they've changed
something, you can parse the email files if necessary in
order to save old emails. Each email is stored as plain text,
one after another, with the beginning of each identifiable
by a line starting with "From - ".
"Ed Cryer" <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote
|
| BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by making
| the profiles incompatible.
|
That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
but not from older TBird? Crazy.
I still don't understand all this hoopla. Why can't people just
go back to a version they like and add a policies.json file if
necessary to block updates? With a browser there's at least
some logic to the idea of getting ssecurity updates. But email?
What's really different between my v. 52 and v. 115 in terms of
actual functionality? Javascript should be blocked, so there's
little or no security issue. TLS is up to date in older versions.
So many people are still thinking like it's the 90s, looking
forward to the next software version because it will actually
have useful, new stuff. These days it usually doesn't. In fact,
most software developers no longer even list changes. I've never
had a problem with T52. I install the same on Win7 and Win10.
It's never crashed and it handles my extensions.
"Ed Cryer" <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote
|
| BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by making
| the profiles incompatible.
|
That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
but not from older TBird? Crazy.
I've been backing up those folders
for years now. For the record, unless they've changed
something, you can parse the email files if necessary in
order to save old emails. Each email is stored as plain text,
one after another, with the beginning of each identifiable
by a line starting with "From - ".
It's amazing that given the ubiquity of email, TBird is pretty much
the only choice. Outlook is a pig and it's Microsoft, with all
the cloud coercion BS. Agent? $30. I've never tried it. Their
website doesn't even say what Windows versions are supported.
And it seems that MS never quite came up with a replacement
for OE that "just works". And it's not as though the requirements
are complex. A program needs to provide a text window, an
organizing GUI, and be able to handle binaries. I haven't ever seen
a program that can send unbutchered HTML email, so even that's
not a requirement.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
| > | BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by
making
| > | the profiles incompatible.
| > |
| >
| > That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
| > but not from older TBird? Crazy.
|
| That's not what he said.
|
Sorry, I worded it wrong. But I understood what he meant.
We're talking about a program that can recognize and import
email from other programs, but can't process its own app data
between some versions without intervention because they broke
backward compatibility in their own software. The whole point
of app data is that it's just the data and remains between
versions.
It's amazing that given the ubiquity of email, TBird is pretty much
the only choice. Outlook is a pig and it's Microsoft, with all
the cloud coercion BS. Agent? $30. I've never tried it. Their
website doesn't even say what Windows versions are supported.
And it seems that MS never quite came up with a replacement
for OE that "just works". And it's not as though the requirements
are complex. A program needs to provide a text window, an
organizing GUI, and be able to handle binaries. I haven't ever seen
a program that can send unbutchered HTML email, so even that's
not a requirement.
Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
"Ed Cryer" <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote
|
| BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by making
| the profiles incompatible.
|
That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
but not from older TBird? Crazy.
I think he means that you can't use an old Thunderbird version with a 'new' (>=v115) format profile. That's understandable, provided that
their was/is a good reason to change the format of the profile.
Paul seems to indicate that an old format profile is (automatically) 'migrated' to a new format profile. He also seems to indicate that there
is some method to 'down'migrate a new format profile to an old format
one.
All in all, reasons for not even thinking about updating/'upgrading' Thunderbird to a newer version, let alone to v115.
On 2023-10-20 14:19, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
"Ed Cryer" <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote
| BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by making >> | the profiles incompatible.
That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
but not from older TBird? Crazy.
I think he means that you can't use an old Thunderbird version with a 'new' (>=v115) format profile. That's understandable, provided that
their was/is a good reason to change the format of the profile.
Paul seems to indicate that an old format profile is (automatically) 'migrated' to a new format profile. He also seems to indicate that there
is some method to 'down'migrate a new format profile to an old format
one.
All in all, reasons for not even thinking about updating/'upgrading' Thunderbird to a newer version, let alone to v115.
Not at all.
Just make a backup before upgrading.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-10-20 14:19, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
"Ed Cryer" <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote
| BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by making >>>> | the profiles incompatible.
That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
but not from older TBird? Crazy.
I think he means that you can't use an old Thunderbird version with a >>> 'new' (>=v115) format profile. That's understandable, provided that
their was/is a good reason to change the format of the profile.
Paul seems to indicate that an old format profile is (automatically) >>> 'migrated' to a new format profile. He also seems to indicate that there >>> is some method to 'down'migrate a new format profile to an old format
one.
All in all, reasons for not even thinking about updating/'upgrading' >>> Thunderbird to a newer version, let alone to v115.
Not at all.
Just make a backup before upgrading.
That's not my point. As I mentioned - also in an exchange with you -
I have a very old version - 60.9.0 - and - like Newyana2 - have no
intention of updating/'upgrading' to anything newer, let alone the
problem ridden, silly looking v115.
As I said a bit earlier: Don't 'fix' what ain't broken.
If you want to use the latest and 'greatest', fine by me, just not my choice.
On 2023-10-20 14:59, Newyana2 wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
| > | BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by
making
| > | the profiles incompatible.
| > |
| >
| > That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
| > but not from older TBird? Crazy.
|
| That's not what he said.
|
Sorry, I worded it wrong. But I understood what he meant.
We're talking about a program that can recognize and import
email from other programs, but can't process its own app data
between some versions without intervention because they broke
backward compatibility in their own software. The whole point
of app data is that it's just the data and remains between
versions.
It is quite common that when you update an app, you can not go back because the old version doesn't understand the config of the old one.
Although there is a command line option (I don't remember it) that helps in this situation (thunderbird).
On 10/20/2023 9:45 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-10-20 14:59, Newyana2 wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
| > | BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by
making
| > | the profiles incompatible.
| > |
| >
| > That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
| > but not from older TBird? Crazy.
|
| That's not what he said.
|
Sorry, I worded it wrong. But I understood what he meant.
We're talking about a program that can recognize and import
email from other programs, but can't process its own app data
between some versions without intervention because they broke
backward compatibility in their own software. The whole point
of app data is that it's just the data and remains between
versions.
It is quite common that when you update an app, you can not go back because the old version doesn't understand the config of the old one.
Although there is a command line option (I don't remember it) that helps in this situation (thunderbird).
On 10/20/2023 9:45 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-10-20 14:59, Newyana2 wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
| > | BTW, they've now cut off a simple return to earlier versions; by
making
| > | the profiles incompatible.
| > |
| >
| > That's good to know. So you can import email from Outlook
| > but not from older TBird? Crazy.
|
| That's not what he said.
|
Sorry, I worded it wrong. But I understood what he meant.
We're talking about a program that can recognize and import
email from other programs, but can't process its own app data
between some versions without intervention because they broke
backward compatibility in their own software. The whole point
of app data is that it's just the data and remains between
versions.
It is quite common that when you update an app, you can not go back because the old version doesn't understand the config of the old one.
Although there is a command line option (I don't remember it) that helps in this situation (thunderbird).
Downgrade option, from command line.
And no, this is unlikely to work in any platform :-)
thunderbird --help
because while they accept certain parameters from the
command line, they're not willing to admit people run
it from the command line like that.
#if defined(XP_WIN) || defined(MOZ_WIDGET_GTK) || defined(XP_MACOSX)
printf(" --headless Run without a GUI.\n");
#endif
// this works, but only after the components have registered. so if you drop
// in a new command line handler, --help won't not until the second run. out
// of the bug, because we ship a component.reg file, it works correctly.
DumpArbitraryHelp(); <=== Indeed, doesn't that say it all ?
} *******************************************************************************
I will stop there, because now I'm getting angry, as I search the next ply.
"Our code is our documentation", yup, in a tin hat.
How could you work in a room, with so much snickering going on ?
Paul
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 06:58:58 |
| Calls: | 6,666 |
| Files: | 12,213 |
| Messages: | 5,336,105 |
