locked Post preference, show message history, emoji


Mark Fletcher
 

Hi All,

I just pushed a few updates:

  • There's a new user preference, Post Preference, where you can specify your default post/reply box (HTML, Markdown, Plain).
  • For Markdown and Plain reply boxes, there's a new Show Message History button, that works similarly to how Y! Groups' button works, to insert the quoted message in the reply box. Figuring out replies and how to quote them is not easy, which is why this is currently not enabled for HTML replies, which are much more difficult. It uses a simple algorithm right now, which generally works for plain text and markdown. I will improve it over time.
  • Emoji are now enabled for Markdown messages cat bowtie smile . You can see the full list of emoji at Emoji Cheat Sheet.

Mark


Duane
 

Took me a few minutes to find Post Preference. For others looking, it's at Profile, Edit Profile, 4th box down and applies to all groups you belong to. One thing I noticed: If I type something before clicking Show Message History, it replaces my typing with the message. Not a big thing since I'd normally click it first, but not quite what I'd expect - inserting at the cursor.

Thanks,
Duane


 

Mark,

For Markdown and Plain reply boxes, there's a new Show Message History
button, ...
I really hate that terminology. It seems to cause a lot of user confusion versus the message thread context surrounding the message and its reply edit box. How about "Insert Quoted Message" - to me that better describes what it does.

that works similarly to how Y! Groups' button works, to insert the
quoted message in the reply box.
Can I have mine shown (inserted) by default? I almost always want to inline quote for context.

And... I love breaking the rules by not wrapping my plain text message bodies (because that generally works better with other people's email services and with on-line message archives that dynamically word-wrap at the window width); but I don't like that at all for quoted text. So could I have a wrap button that re-wraps paragraphs (blank line separated) and if the paragraph is reply quoted ("> ") inserts the quote marking on each of the wrapped lines. Note, a line with only the quote marking should also be considered a paragraph separator.

-- Shal


 

I agree with Shal on both of these points because that's the most obvious to people who don't see as well, and it's the way I personally prefer.
Dano


 

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 11:21 pm, Shal Farley shal@... wrote:

that works similarly to how Y! Groups' button works, to insert the quoted message in the reply box.

Can I have mine shown (inserted) by default? I almost always want to inline quote for context.

I think it makes sense to just remove that button and have the message quoted in the reply box.

And... I love breaking the rules by not wrapping my plain text message bodies (because that generally works better with other people's email services and with on-line message archives that dynamically word-wrap at the window width); but I don't like that at all for quoted text. So could I have a wrap button that re-wraps paragraphs (blank line separated) and if the paragraph is reply quoted ("> ") inserts the quote marking on each of the wrapped lines. Note, a line with only the quote marking should also be considered a paragraph separator.

So, when quoting a message for reply, you want long lines wrapped? Around what # of characters per line, 78? FWIW, the emails currently generated with long quoted lines not wrapped still look fine (like your paragraph here).

Thanks, Mark


 

Mark,

I think it makes sense to just remove that button and have the
message quoted in the reply box.
Agreed.

So, when quoting a message for reply, you want long lines wrapped?
Not necessarily automatically. Sometimes wrap algorithms have unexpected results, which I'd like to be able to undo and re-do by hand.

Around what # of characters per line, 78?
No need to push up against the standard's 80 limit, I'd go with more like 72, and then not count initial gt (">"), bar ("|") or space characters (maybe initial non-alphanumerics). That would avoid having multi-level quotes turn into gibberish.

FWIW, the emails currently generated with long quoted lines not
wrapped still look fine (like your paragraph here).
In the text/HTML, yes, but not so much in the text/plain part.

Speaking of which, maybe the format selector for a reply should match that of the replied message, saving the user's profile option for new posts. That is, my post was text/plain - your reply I think should be likewise, unless you deliberately change it. Or have I already missed that boat?

Too, I was thinking of the wrap feature in the context of a plain text reply. In HTML the handling of quoted matter is entirely different, and we need formatting tools to allow us to add and remove blockquote layers. I'm not sure if that's what the paragraph indent/outdent buttons do (they sure don't on Y! Groups).

Markdown likewise, since it sees paragraphs rather than lines, an initial > is to blockquote the paragraph is fine.

-- Shal


 

> I think it makes sense to just remove that button and have the
> message quoted in the reply box.

Agreed.
Personally I agree, but I'm concerned that some of our users may not realize they should delete everything they don't need. And since the cursor doesn't appear above the quoted text lead in, some users will plug in the new text right there. I'd rather see a button, perhaps next to the format option, to add quoted text. Hopefully that would encourage posters to *not* add it unless they consciously need it.

No need to push up against the standard's 80 limit, I'd go with more
like 72, and then not count initial gt (">"), bar ("|") or space
characters (maybe initial non-alphanumerics). That would avoid having
multi-level quotes turn into gibberish.
Another comment, and there may be a reason this won't work, is to leave off spaces between '>'s, or at least only use one space, to prevent pushing the quoted text off the page in long discourses. More like this:

FWIW, the emails currently generated with long quoted lines not
wrapped still look fine (like your paragraph here).
Dano


 

Shal -
How did you get the '>' to stick in your message? They sure didn't in mine and I much prefer them in plain text. For users with diminishing eyesight those vertical gray bars may not show up very well, and in multilevel conversations they may become hard to follow.

Dano


 

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 12:14 pm, D R Stinson dano@... wrote:

Shal - How did you get the '>' to stick in your message? They sure didn't in mine and I much prefer them in plain text. For users with diminishing eyesight those vertical gray bars may not show up very well, and in multilevel conversations they may become hard to follow.

If you're referring to how they show up on the website, the reason Shal's message has '>' and yours has a grey bar, is that Shal inserted a space before every '>' in each line of his message (or his email program did). If the first character on a line is a '>', we do the gray bar thing.

Mark


 

Dano,

Shal - How did you get the '>' to stick in your message?
What Mark said - and blame my email client for sticking in the leading spaces. I'm not sure if I have a control for that, the leading spaces don't show in my compose window.

-- Shal


 

Dano,

Personally I agree, but I'm concerned that some of our users may not
realize they should delete everything they don't need. ...
Hopefully that would encourage posters to *not* add it unless they
consciously need it.
It is I (reading by email) that need it, not them. Except those willing to in-line quote.

If it wasn't prone to drive Mark to madness I'd like to see the quoted material (but never the new material) hidden in a ... button on-line in thread context; the second level and higher hidden by the button online in message context. In digest trimmed to just first-level quote. In individual messages not trimmed at all. And of course in-line quotes unmolested in any case.

Then it could all be left in the composed message, with the appropriate remediation happening for digest an on-line readers.

Another comment, and there may be a reason this won't work, is to
leave off spaces between '>'s, or at least only use one space, to
prevent pushing the quoted text off the page in long discourses.
Part of the point is that there is no longer a concept of "off the page" -- nearly all means of reading email these days can handle longer lines. Compressing the spaces out of quote markers may needlessly reduce legibility. Not that I have a problem with that either way.

-- Shal


 

On 1/28/2015 12:10 PM, D R Stinson wrote:
I'd rather see a button, perhaps next to the format option, to add quoted text. Hopefully that would encourage posters to*not* add it unless they consciously need it.
Here on TBird (and I think someone else said their mail client did it
also), before hitting the reply button, I can highlight a section of
text - and reply will bring just that section text and the poster
(see above) into the reply (and I chose when I set up the client to
have the response below the quoted text).

How difficult would it be to implement something like that? I think
explaining to anyone who knows about copy/paste that they highlight
the text they're responding to and then click reply, if easy enough
to implement, would be easier than trying to get them to delete
portions of the text. Even people who have been around mailing lists
for a long time often leave a bunch of footers!

dg


 

Here on TBird (and I think someone else said their mail client did it
also), before hitting the reply button, I can highlight a section of
text - and reply will bring just that section text and the poster
(see above) into the reply (and I chose when I set up the client to
have the response below the quoted text).

How difficult would it be to implement something like that?
I think that has some real merit, Diana. But not being a programmer, I don't know how difficult it would be. Perhaps Mark can comment?
Dano


dread_axefr@...