>> We can't deny that the clik-kiddies are increasingly displacing the more
>> efficient protocols like Usenet, with blogs.
> The (aptly called) "clik-kiddies" have to know about "...more efficient
> protocols like Usenet..." first. Though I do agree with you and feel your
> pain. :{
>> For one who has only dial-up connectivety, I need to: receive, edit reply &
>> send reply in 2 separate connection sessions. So it's convenient to
>> copy-paste between the blog-'browser' and a separate 'editing-text'.
> If you are trying to not burn connection time while editing replies, I don't
> see many options other than to make two connections.
>> I try to use the old-proven method of citing: ">"; with line len of < 72.
>> But since normal/fad-following users, get the auto-line-len facility of
>> their standard browsers, apparently ">"-usage is inappropriate? Eg. a
>> mobile user with lin-len-display of < 72, would not get my ">" lines
>> correctly formatted.
> A couple of points:
> 1) Do *NOT* let the incompleteness of something cause you to not follow long
> accepted and followed standards.
> 2) Format=flowed is your /friend/. ;) (Use a line length of 72 - 78.)
> 3) You might try indicating replies differently, with out the leading
> character so that when the lines are incorrectly re-wrapped for the given
> display they will not have the leading (reply / quote) character in the
> middle of the line.
>> Does any body else blog-reply via lynx or elinks? This has the advantage
>> of not needing a bloated-browser for each pending reply.
> As long as the browser of your choice will work with the blog, I see no
> reason why /what/ browser you use matters.
What I find is that it's not clear how you're supposed to arrange things,
and there often isn't a means to preview what you've typed (that varies,
sometimes it's there, sometimes the preview isn't). And what looks good
when viewed with Lynx may not look good on a graphic browser (or
vice versa). I thought I'd figured it out, but in some recent cases
ended up with a badly formatted result, so it seems to vary.
Of course, an increasingly common problem is that they have one of
those graphic fields that you are supposed to type in, and that makes
things hard (at the least) when using a text only browser. There
again, it seems to vary, sometimes I post a comment and nothing happens,
and it turns out there was one of those graphic things to type in, but
it was invisible (ie not even something that says "type in what you see"),
while other times there's something to indicate the need.
That's not helpful, but I'm still trying to figure out what varies. It's
an odd situation, I got accused of ranting because of bad formatting
recently (in that case, it was definitely different from what I'd noticed
previously), as if I was some newcomer, when the reality is I'm forced
to adapt since the newcomers don't want to come to the old spaces.
Michael
by