dnmiller@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David Neal Miller) (05/10/91)
As a newcomer to elm, I find the way it handles .signature files to be, well, regrettable. Unlike mm and rn/trn, elm adds the contents of one's .signature file to the editable message; that is, invoke vi and there's the contents of the .signature file, cluttering up the editing area. The doesn't seem to be any alternative to pushing the d*** text down as one composes and edits, or dG-ing the signature away altogether and reading it back in (sans leading hyphens) before saving and quitting. I thought that the whole point of a .signature file is to keep it out of the way and have it appended (or not) at the point of sending the message on its way. That's why mm and rn/trn prompts with an "append signature?" type question. Am I missing something? I'm more or less of a novice, and wouldn't be surprised if I am. Or is elm just poorly designed in this respect? If the latter, what's the hope of whipping it up to shape in a future revision? Many thanks in advance for any replies. -- David Neal Miller Internet: miller.3@osu.edu Bitnet: miller.3@ohstmail
syd@DSI.COM (Syd Weinstein) (05/11/91)
dnmiller@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David Neal Miller) writes: >As a newcomer to elm, I find the way it handles .signature >files to be, well, regrettable. >Unlike mm and rn/trn, elm adds the contents of one's >.signature file to the editable message; >Am I missing something? I'm more or less of a novice, and >wouldn't be surprised if I am. Or is elm just poorly >designed in this respect? The reason Dave left the sig in the editable portion of the message was to allow it to be edited also. Now I must admit I rarely edit my sig as part of the message. But that was his intention. Is it poor design? Thats subjective. It was what he intended and he had his reason. Do we intend to change it.... Not presently, there are many more important things missing from 2.4 before that one. -- ===================================================================== Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP Elm Coordinator Datacomp Systems, Inc. Voice: (215) 947-9900 syd@DSI.COM or dsinc!syd FAX: (215) 938-0235
pedregal@legato.cs.umass.edu (Cris Pedregal-Martin) (05/13/91)
In article <1991May10.185112.28744@DSI.COM>, syd@DSI.COM (Syd Weinstein) writes: |> dnmiller@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David Neal Miller) writes: [...] |> >Unlike mm and rn/trn, elm adds the contents of one's |> >.signature file to the editable message; [...] |> The reason Dave left the sig in the editable portion of the message |> was to allow it to be edited also. Now I must admit I rarely |> edit my sig as part of the message. But that was his intention. I, for one, edit my signature often (e.g. to remove some part, or to expand my e-address when writing to an e-mail-illiterate :-) person). On the other hand, I always leave _some_ signature, so I don't see a need for a question asking me whether to include it. |> |> Is it poor design? Thats subjective. It was what he intended and |> he had his reason. Do we intend to change it.... Not presently, |> there are many more important things missing from 2.4 before that one. My vote is leave is at is. --Cris [using the newsreader mailer and hence a lean signature :-)] -- Cristobal Pedregal Martin COINS Dept. - UMass - Amherst, MA 01003 -- pedregal@cs.umass.edu
rob@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US (Rob Bernardo) (05/14/91)
syd@DSI.COM wrote: >dnmiller@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David Neal Miller) writes: >>As a newcomer to elm, I find the way it handles .signature >>files to be, well, regrettable. > >>Unlike mm and rn/trn, elm adds the contents of one's >>.signature file to the editable message; >>Am I missing something? I'm more or less of a novice, and >>wouldn't be surprised if I am. Or is elm just poorly >>designed in this respect? >The reason Dave left the sig in the editable portion of the message >was to allow it to be edited also. Now I must admit I rarely >edit my sig as part of the message. But that was his intention. Actually, my recollection was that this was a change made by the ELM development group by popular demand. The thinking was that if you did want to edit the signature, if it was included you could, or you could simply ignore it. -- Rob Bernardo Mt. Diablo Software Solutions email: rob@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US phone: (415) 827-4301
news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU (Six o'clock News) (05/14/91)
>>As a newcomer to elm, I find the way it handles .signature >>files to be, well, regrettable. >>Unlike mm and rn/trn, elm adds the contents of one's >>.signature file to the editable message; >The reason Dave left the sig in the editable portion of the message >was to allow it to be edited also. Now I must admit I rarely >edit my sig as part of the message. But that was his intention. From: ggurman@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Gail Gurman) Path: cory.Berkeley.EDU!ggurman Personally, I would like the ability to designate certain people for whom my .signature does NOT get appended. I have a very simple .sig that simply tells people my address. My friends already know my address and have aliases for me, so they don't need the information. As it is right now, I delete my .sig more often than not. Needless to say, I'm glad that elm doesn't automatically append the .sig after I'm done editing. Perhaps, however, this could be an option for those who do. Maybe it could come just after the optional list of NOSIG aliases in the .elmrc? Gail Send mail to: ggurman@cory.Berkeley.EDU
chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) (05/15/91)
According to dnmiller@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David Neal Miller): >Unlike mm and rn/trn, elm adds the contents of one's >.signature file to the editable message. It's a feature. If you want to enhance, trim or eliminate your signature from a particular message, it's easy. -- Brand X Industries Custodial, Refurbishing and Containment Service: When You Never, Ever Want To See It Again [tm] Chip Salzenberg <chip@tct.com>, <uunet!pdn!tct!chip>
fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home) (05/15/91)
rob@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US (Rob Bernardo) writes: >Actually, my recollection was that this was a change made by the ELM >development group by popular demand. The thinking was that if you >did want to edit the signature, if it was included you could, or you >could simply ignore it. I certainly would not want this option changed. fred -- W. Fred Rump office: fred.COMPU.COM 26 Warren St. home: fred@icdi10.COMPU.COM Beverly, NJ. 08010 bang: ...{dsinc uunet}!cdin-1!icdi10!fred 609-386-6846 "Freude... Alle Menschen werden Brueder..." - The Ode
griswold@infonode.ingr.com (John L. Griswold) (05/16/91)
fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home) writes: >rob@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US (Rob Bernardo) writes: >>Actually, my recollection was that this was a change made by the ELM >>development group by popular demand. The thinking was that if you >>did want to edit the signature, if it was included you could, or you >>could simply ignore it. >I certainly would not want this option changed. Ditto >fred >-- >W. Fred Rump office: fred.COMPU.COM >26 Warren St. home: fred@icdi10.COMPU.COM >Beverly, NJ. 08010 bang: ...{dsinc uunet}!cdin-1!icdi10!fred >609-386-6846 "Freude... Alle Menschen werden Brueder..." - The Ode +--------------------------------------------+----------------------------+ | John L. Griswold | Bentley-Systems Inc. | | UUCP: ...uunet!ingr!bntley!jlgbox!griswold | 690 Pennsylvania Drive | | AT&T: (215) 458-5000 | Eagleview Corporate Center | | ** My views are rarely shared by anyone ** | Exton, PA 19341, USA | +--------------------------------------------+----------------------------+ -- +--------------------------------------------+----------------------------+ | John L. Griswold | Bentley-Systems Inc. | | UUCP: ...uunet!ingr!bntley!jlgbox!griswold | 690 Pennsylvania Drive | | AT&T: (215) 458-5000 | Eagleview Corporate Center |