Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site amdahl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!amdahl!gam
From: gam@amdahl.UUCP (G A Moffett)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.sources
Subject: Re: rn(1) readers: fix followup ugliness!
Message-ID: <2623@amdahl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 21-Jan-86 21:57:19 EST
Article-I.D.: amdahl.2623
Posted: Tue Jan 21 21:57:19 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 23-Jan-86 10:05:13 EST
References: <2604@amdahl.UUCP> <8480@amdcad.UUCP>
Reply-To: gam@amdahl.UUCP (G A Moffett)
Organization: Amdahl Corp, UTS Products Group
Lines: 30
Xref: watmath net.news:4546 net.sources:4185

In article <8480@amdcad.UUCP> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes:

> In article <2604@amdahl.UUCP> gam@amdahl.UUCP (G A Moffett) writes:
> >A heading line is followed directly by the included text,
> >and the ">"'s at the beginnings of lines are inserted with
> >no following space!  It looks very crowded.
> 
> This is a matter of taste. Would you rather see
> 
> >> junk junk junk
> 
> or
> 
> > > junk junk?

I agree with Phil's comments about "> > >"; I didn't think of that at
first.  I will make a point of editing those leading "> > > " to
">>> " before posting (hey, aren't editors wonderful?).

I am not doing that in this article, of course, for purposes of example.

By the way, in purely esthetic terms, doesn't this followup look better
than the format Phil's originally used?
-- 
Gordon A. Moffett		...!{ihnp4,cbosgd,hplabs}!amdahl!gam

~ Deine Zauber binden wieder, ~
~ Was die Mode streng geteilt; ~
~ Alle Menschen werden Brueder, ~
~ Wo dein sanfter Fluegel weilt. ~