On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 08:40:52PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: > On 2005-10-13 14:37:29 -0400, Derek Martin wrote: > > > People's idea of what is readable differs. Regardless of what > > the majority find readable, there will be plenty of people who > > prefer something else. I can see no justifiable reason for not > > letting them decide for themselves they want longer lines. > > Readability is actually something that you can measure empirically. > Take the challenge from my earlier document, do the experiment, and > time reading the same amount of text in different formattings. So, you're saying that the line length which is most readable is identical for every single human being on the planet Earth? I don't think that's even possible. I also think it's not even really all that relevant. There are other reasons besides readability why a user might want longer lines, i.e. the ability to fit more of the e-mail on the screen at one time. It doesn't matter what the reasons are; the fact is that some users want this functionality, and it's easy enough to provide without harming anyone. So what's the hangup? I'd like to point out that exactly this sort of issue was what caused Mutt to fork, started a thread about Mutt's stagnation (started by someone other than me, FWIW), and resulted in a flurry of activity for a while. Thomas, you objected to the fork then, and asked essentially how to avoid it. The answer is the same now as it was then, and it's simple: stop being so obstinate about rejecting features people want which are plenty easy enough to code, just because you don't agree with them. For a while you were being really good about it, but now it seems your mindset has returned to the other way... -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thank the spammers.
Attachment:
pgpAiuAaiuh3H.pgp
Description: PGP signature