Shal, here's what I've noticed since my last post. Suppose I use block-quote on the web to indent text consisting of the part of a message I want to respond to. There are two cases: 1. The group has 'strip HTML set and 2. It does not have that set.?
First, note that I can still essentially/implicitly invoke the block-quote function of the editor ,even in a strip-HTML group, by selecting and copying a portion of the message I'm replying to before I hit reply. In my draft of the message, the quoted text appears indebted with '>' signs to the left. But in the web version of my message, the quoted text shows up as usual, without the symbols but with the same vertical line at left that appears in a non-strip-HTML group.
Where it gets weird is with email versions of my message. I am using gmail, so I don't know how much of this applies to other email servers. But here's what I see consistently:?
In the strip-HTML group, the quoted text -which, as I said, appears indented with a vertical line at left, as one would expect - instead shows up in the email version with the quoted text nicely in purple. Readers can easily distinguish the quoted text from my my response immediately below it. All is fine and well.
However, in a non-strip-HTML group, the email version of my message utterly fails to separate the quoted text from my response below it. Even the line space that appears between the two in s strip-HTML group is missing.?
This is the case (because my group is non-strip-HTML) that I normally see, and which got me to finally resort to italicizing and putting quotation marks around the quoted text when I reply to a message, EVEN IF I am responding via the web.
I'm not sure what's happening, but I'm guessing that the '>' symbols for the indentation in a strip-HTML group are a sign to gmail to handle the text as quoted. But in a non-strip-HTML group, gmail has already performed that interpretation and that function, and has therefore gotten rid of the symbols by the find gmail gets the message, so gmail really doesn't know that it should distinguish the quoted text by making it purple.
Does that make any sense?
J
Sent from my iPhone
Shal,
As you've noted, two issues here. I've always been annoyed by the top-posting algorithm's overzealousness, hiding ANY quoted material, not just prior posts but eve purposely quoted text from another source. I've resorted to inserting any sort of bogus text after a quote in order to foil it, but often I forget. It seems that nothing can be done about this. I know Mark has tried, according to what he's said in the past.
As for the gmail phone app, mine evidently behaves differently than yours, for some odd reason. Gmail does make quoted material purple on my Mac, but not on my iPhone. Before I resorted to italicizing the quoted material and even sometimes explicitly putting quotes around it, I used to see my versions of my posts on my phone beginning with statements that I utterly disagreed with and was about to counter, with those statements looking like I was the one saying them. Now, as i said, I work around that.
J
