Windows 95 support ?

[George]

On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 08:22:07PM -0400, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, George wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:43:03PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> > > On 26 April 2006 15:30, mwoehlke wrote:
> > >
> > > > Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > > >> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 12:04:40AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > >>> Christopher Faylor, le Tue 25 Apr 2006 14:05:54 -0400, a ?crit :
> > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 06:01:49PM +0000, g.r.vansickle@xxxxx
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > >>                                             tsk, tsk.
> > > >>
> > > >> This really is a losing battle isn't it?
> > > >
> > > > Has anyone considered reconfiguring the mail software to 'correct'
> > > > this automatically?
> > >
> > >   Well, it's trivial to configure rewriting of email headers.
> > >
> > >  But we're talking about body text here, and the web archive of this
> > >  list.  If you keep what you present to the world as an authentic
> > >  record of what people wrote, then there are moral and perhaps even
> > >  legal implications if you feel you're allowed to rewrite it - even in
> > >  what seems a mechanical and trivial way, the thing is that what you
> > >  are then presenting in your "archive" is in fact *not verbatim*.
> >
> > IIRC, Google does something similar for their archives of usenet (aka
> > Google Groups) postings.  Admittedly, munging email body content isn't
> > trivial, but not impossible, either, made easier by the fact that any
> > email address would invariably be part of single-line attribution.
> > You're correct in saying it wouldn't be varbatim, but I wonder how
> > important that really is.
> 
> Heh.  Try reading a piece of LaTeX preamble code in comp.text.tex (which
> makes heavy use of the @ sign) on Google groups...  The cut-and-paste
> approach produces mostly rubbish, as Dave so eloquently put it.

Again, I find Google Groups mostly unreadable, and unusable, so I'm not
surprised.  I use mutt for news as well as mail, so my comp.text.tex
archive is perfectly readable, albeit with the colouring thrown off on
occasion.  Still, body-content munging can be appropriate in certain
circumstances.

> -- 
> Igor
>              http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
>              pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
>   .-"-.        
>  /|6 6|\     Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)      
> {/(_0_)\}    old name: Igor Pechtchanski               
>  _/ ^ \_     Wag wag wag. Woof!             
> (/ /^\ \)-'                                                                                  
>  ""' '""     "Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu 
>              t'en rends compte."  "But no -- you are no fool; you call
>              yourself a fool, there's proof enough in  that!" --
>              Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"
>

Especially in the event that you're a dog owner who suffers the daily
ignominity of living in a neighbourhood where the cats are so numerous
one would think they were lawn ornaments. ;-)

-- 
George