On Dec 5, 2007, at 4:41 AM, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/fa.info-cpm/browse_thread/thread/
>> 1826bb3801bfafe3/abaa1b9631e34c0d?lnk=st&q=westfw%
>> 40wharton#abaa1b9631e34c0d
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/fa.info-cpm/browse_thread/thread/ 
> 1826bb3801bfafe3/abaa1b9631e34c0d?lnk=st&q=westfw% 
> 40wharton#abaa1b9631e34c0d
>
> <http://groups.google.com/group/fa.info-cpm/browse_thread/thread/ 
> 1826bb3801bfafe3/abaa1b9631e34c0d?lnk=st&q=westfw% 
> 40wharton#abaa1b9631e34c0d>
>
> I don't know how useful the <> brackets around long URLs are, but  
> it seems
> that some clients use this when formatting the message that is to  
> be sent
> and don't linebreak what's inside, and maybe some clients are even  
> smart
> enough when receiving such broken URLs to join them together.
>
> Does anybody see any difference in the two URLs (with and without <>)

I saw no difference on reception, and I think I've noticed previously
that it's my transmitting client that breaks up long URLs whether they
have the angle-brackets or not.  I guess this message will show...

BillW
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist