 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran wrote:
>
> Ron Parker wrote:
>
> > > Or those who, for one reason or other, don't like to use a html browser to
> > >read the news (like me).
>
> My 2 cents :
> To be frank, this limitation would be logical it if this were, say, a newsgroup
> about rural farming in tropical countries where the users are likely to have
> limited computer resources. But this NG is dedicated to computer graphics, and
> used by people who have up-to-date configurations, if only to run CG software and
> Internet connections able to download binaries. I've also noticed that the people
> who seem to have trouble with HTML postings are also rather advanced computer
> users, which doesn't make sense... When I have trouble reading a file because of
> a new popular format, I search for the latest version or patch that supports it
> and always find it. This what I did when I started receiving HTML-coded e-mails.
> Is that really impossible for HTML post reading, even without using Netscape ? Or
> is there something sentimental about using non-HTML supporting newsreaders ?
> What annoys me is not actually the ban on HTML posting itself (which I don't find
> very useful, though it could come handy sometimes), but the fact that new users
> here get flamed for this the first time they post, when sometimes they don't even
> know they're doing HTML posts because it's the default mode in popular
> newsreaders or email programs. This is not a "courteous" way to welcome people,
> IMHO.
> For the record, the policy n the French pov group is to allow HTML posting and we
> haven't had any complaints so far, except the occasional joke on the occasional
> ugly background or HTML mess, which is still better than flaming newbies for
> something they're not guilty of, and starting threads about it.
>
> G.
You know Gilles I agree with you almost completely. A very vocal minority
have have asserted that html posts are an -inconvenience- for them and that
in order to read posts that are in html format they have to use a separate
program that will read them. This implies they have the resources at their
disposal to handle html posts but stick with software that does not support
it out of preference. In this case the minority are controlling the majority.
Personally I use Netscape that can and does handle html posts without problem
- even in the French NG's with their tacky backgrounds :)
One last point though is that html posts do take up more space on the
server and if more people posted in html is would chew up server resources
at an alarming rate. Unfortunately the server resources are not unlimited
nor are the funds that provide them. I personally will shed a tear or two
the day that this servers resources become so strained that automatic
expirations on messages has to be applied to provide new resource for future
posts. There are some great messages here and some of them I refer back to
often for my own edification as well as the edification of others.
These facts aside this news server admin. has made it policy on this server
to ban html posts. As one of the people on this server who often greets new
visitors for the first time I try to help enforce this policy. I do however
try to do so as politely as possible when pointing this out to new visitors
and never attempt to "flame" them in the process. I also take the time to
explain why this policy is such as it is in the hopes that they understand
that it is not a flame as much as it is a necessity for all people involved.
I would like to encourage everyone on this server that if they do take it
upon themselves to "correct" someone for posting in html, rather than in plain
text, that they do so politely and take the time to explain it to the person
why plain text is necessary. Otherwise it does come off as a flame and some
people may take it personally and never come back. That might be as much our
loss as it is theirs for you will never know what their future contributions
to the POV-Ray community might have been nor what they might have received
in return from us.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
> I would like to encourage everyone on this server that if they do take it
> upon themselves to "correct" someone for posting in html, rather than in plain
> text, that they do so politely and take the time to explain it to the person
> why plain text is necessary. Otherwise it does come off as a flame and some
> people may take it personally and never come back. That might be as much our
> loss as it is theirs for you will never know what their future contributions
> to the POV-Ray community might have been nor what they might have received
> in return from us.
Well-made point(s), Ken, and thanks for the reply I agree with.
End of this thread for me.
G.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I started asking why you don't like using an html- browser, but I suppose
it's none of my bussiness. The snapshot.gif was very instructive, though!
Was that done in Linux?
Now I realize that my answers to html-posts have been html also,
unwittingly. Especially annoying when you repeat a picture also... Is there
a really quick way to see that a post is html in MS outlook express 5?
--
Regards,
Sander
Nieminen Juha <war### [at] punarastas cstutfi> schreef in berichtnieuws
38993ebb@news.povray.org...
> Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
> : For the most part it is a matter of courtesy for those who do not have
> : html enabled browsers.
>
> Or those who, for one reason or other, don't like to use a html browser
to
> read the news (like me).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Feb 2000 11:22:12 -0800, Ken wrote:
>Gilles Tran wrote:
>>
>> But this NG is dedicated to computer graphics, and
>> used by people who have up-to-date configurations, if only to run CG software and
>> Internet connections able to download binaries. I've also noticed that the people
>> who seem to have trouble with HTML postings are also rather advanced computer
>> users, which doesn't make sense... When I have trouble reading a file because of
>> a new popular format, I search for the latest version or patch that supports it
>> and always find it. This what I did when I started receiving HTML-coded e-mails.
>> Is that really impossible for HTML post reading, even without using Netscape ? Or
>> is there something sentimental about using non-HTML supporting newsreaders ?
The main problem I have with using Netscape to read news is that it has horrible
keyboard support, no support for scoring posts, and a cramped, ugly interface
that makes me scroll far too much (800x600 screen, not by choice) to read a
simple 30-line post. On top of that, having to switch back and forth from the
message pane to the message list is annoying in the extreme. My explanation
for why I use slrn is simple: I touch-type and I have tendonitis. Interfaces
that force me to take my hand off the keyboard and move the mouse to a tiny
scrollbar button to do something I do often are not interfaces that I use for
long. In addition to that, Netscape has far too many bugs and idiosyncrasies
that I don't want to have to deal with. Outhouse Express is worse.
It looks like you're falling into a common trap: you think that just because my
newsreader doesn't support HTML that it must not be state-of-the-art. In fact,
it supports far more _useful_ features, such as scoring and scripting, than
Netscape ever will, and takes up less than a megabyte of hard drive space in
the process. On top of that, it's configurable, so I can add all the NNTP
headers the Netscape designers thought were unnecessary when I need them (such
as Expires: ) And if HTML support is the hallmark of an advanced newsreader,
why is it that only two of the dozens of available newsreaders have it, and
none of the others have plans to add it anytime soon?
Finally, when the next killer ActiveX/Javascript trojan comes along, I'll be
immune. Will you?
> You know Gilles I agree with you almost completely. A very vocal minority
>have have asserted that html posts are an -inconvenience- for them and that
>in order to read posts that are in html format they have to use a separate
>program that will read them. This implies they have the resources at their
>disposal to handle html posts but stick with software that does not support
>it out of preference. In this case the minority are controlling the majority.
Yes, I have Netscape. I use it to look at the pretty pictures in p.b.i,
because it's more convenient in that case. But I use slrn even to read the
non-binary posts in p.b.i, just because it doesn't force me to use the mouse
to do everything useful, and because it does things Netscape just can't do
and has configurations Netscape just doesn't have. Besides that, it's open
source, and I'm kinda partial to open source. I've even modified my copy of
slrn, as you should all recall, to strip objectionable vcards. Let's see you
(the generic you, not Ken or Gilles) do that with Netscape. (Yes, I know
about Mozilla. Come find me when it's ready for normal people to run.)
Someday, I'll teach slrn to strip the common tags from postings made with
Netscape, particularly the nbsp travesty, and then I'll stop complaining
because all that HTML will be human-readable again.
However, I do agree with both of you that if we're going to ask new users not
to post in HTML, we should do it quietly and with respect, and preferably with
directions on how to turn off HTML posting in their newsreader of choice.
--
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker wrote:
> The main problem I have with using Netscape to read news is
<snippity snip>
Your views on this subject are well documented on this server. Funny
though that when someone suggests that since they are left handed they
are discriminated against by the right handed populace everyone says
learn to live with it Mr. Minority. When the minority non-html compliant
news reader people protest they get all of the support they want. What
a cruel twist of fate. < Insert big smiley >
P.S. I don't recall a single vcard posted here since the big debate.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Feb 2000 14:16:23 -0800, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>P.S. I don't recall a single vcard posted here since the big debate.
I think I saw one but the next post from that person did not have a
vcard. Makes one think.
Peter Popov
pet### [at] usanet
ICQ: 15002700
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran wrote:
>
> My 2 cents :
[snip]
I have no problem with a HTML post, as long as it's not loaded with background
images etc. The latter does annoy me though, since my bandwidth is limited and I
am strongly against useless bloat.
Flaming new users about HTML posting is indeed a rash thing to do. But the rule
of using plain text is not unreasonable IMO. After all, HTML has little benefit
in a discussion group - and as such, HTML ability shold not be the highest
priority in newsreader development.
I hope there won't be another flamewar on this subject...
Margus
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Your views on this subject are well documented on this server. Funny
>though that when someone suggests that since they are left handed they
>are discriminated against by the right handed populace everyone says
>learn to live with it Mr. Minority. When the minority non-html compliant
>news reader people protest they get all of the support they want. What
>a cruel twist of fate. < Insert big smiley >
>
>P.S. I don't recall a single vcard posted here since the big debate.
HTML in many cases doubles the size of a message, it doesn't add anything
to the post, just costs me more to dl the groups.
I've seen a Vcard or two recently, but not many I'm glad to say.
HTML is overkill for a text message, like using Power Point to write
a memo.
My 2p worth, I'll shut up now.
--
Cheers
Steve email mailto:sjl### [at] ndirectcouk
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps.
web http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~sjlen/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
12:45am up 2 days, 14 min, 6 users, load average: 1.90, 1.68, 1.45
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
> You know Gilles I agree with you almost completely. A very vocal minority
> have have asserted that html posts are an -inconvenience- for them and that
> in order to read posts that are in html format they have to use a separate
> program that will read them. This implies they have the resources at their
> disposal to handle html posts but stick with software that does not support
> it out of preference. In this case the minority are controlling the majority.
> Personally I use Netscape that can and does handle html posts without problem
> - even in the French NG's with their tacky backgrounds :)
>
> One last point though is that html posts do take up more space on the
> server and if more people posted in html is would chew up server resources
> at an alarming rate. Unfortunately the server resources are not unlimited
> nor are the funds that provide them. I personally will shed a tear or two
> the day that this servers resources become so strained that automatic
> expirations on messages has to be applied to provide new resource for future
> posts. There are some great messages here and some of them I refer back to
> often for my own edification as well as the edification of others.
>
> These facts aside this news server admin. has made it policy on this server
> to ban html posts. As one of the people on this server who often greets new
> visitors for the first time I try to help enforce this policy. I do however
> try to do so as politely as possible when pointing this out to new visitors
> and never attempt to "flame" them in the process. I also take the time to
> explain why this policy is such as it is in the hopes that they understand
> that it is not a flame as much as it is a necessity for all people involved.
>
> I would like to encourage everyone on this server that if they do take it
> upon themselves to "correct" someone for posting in html, rather than in plain
> text, that they do so politely and take the time to explain it to the person
> why plain text is necessary. Otherwise it does come off as a flame and some
> people may take it personally and never come back. That might be as much our
> loss as it is theirs for you will never know what their future contributions
> to the POV-Ray community might have been nor what they might have received
> in return from us.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.htmlhttp://www.povray.org/links/
Well, I just wanted to point out that there is another factor here at play. Ken and
Gilles had some very good points, but I do have a HTML capable news reader and I do
use that for reading, so I have no problems on that end. Where I do have problems is
with the HTML itself.
Often the color scheme looks poor for me (black on a full white background looks nice
on paper, but from a CRT it can increase eye-strain and fatigue). And then there's the
problems with the font specifications themselves. Often the fonts will be specified in
absolute sizes instead of in relative sizes (e.g. "SIZE=3"). This often makes things
almost unreadable for me, since I'm running a hi-res display. I mean, really, why are
you (the abstract HTML poster) forcing me to read 10-pixel fonts??? Why do you know
better than me what is comfortable to read with my setup on my computer? Additionally,
I am one of the average people who are more comfortable reading information that's not
splayed completely across the screen, but is instead kept in nicer columns. Plain text
posting is usually wrapped to 80 columns or less, and is more legible. HTML postings
usually don't as well. Take a peek at your average newspaper or magazine to get and
idea of what I mean about columns.
And then there's the bloat factor. I luckily live in the USA, and have DSL so I
personally don't have to worry much about this, but much of the world actually pays
per-minute for connections. Yes, there are binary posts here, but duplicating text in
HTML posts bloats those by not just x 2, but more. Just take a peek at this before and
after:
before:
// sphere { <0.6725250, 0, 0>, 1.0, strength 1.0 }
after:
<br> // sphere { <0.6725125,
0, 0>, 1.0, strength 1.0 }
before:
diffuse 0.8
after:
<br> diffuse
0.8
So that second copy in HTML is not only a duplicate, but much larger (for text, that
is). Plus the fact that the HTML version went and threw in extra line breaks where
it's just getting in the way. Bleah.
Anyway, I'm just trying to point out some other possible reasons to stick with
plain-text over HTML. I don't think the "my software doesn't handle it" is a very good
reason. I do think that how it might make things hard on others is more of a good
reason. However, I think it's mainly a point of being aware of different factors and
making an informed choice. Especially if your posting agent does nice HTML that works
well for most readers, then that's not as big of an issue.
And then there are the newsreaders that post in plain text and mark their posts as
such, but don't bother inserting the proper line breaks (guess which one is the worst
offender), which is directly against the actual Internet standards for mail and news
postings. Those realllllly bug me. Especially since I don't have my reader set to
'correct' for that broken behavior (since doing so can cause other problems).
--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
<HTML>
Is this submission <HTML>?</HTML>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
