PDA

View Full Version : [Dixonary] Round 1909 - New Word: REEZED


Tony Abell
May 24th, 2008, 12:43 PM
As most of you suspected, Johnny let the word out of the dictionary with his
first-class Dixon this morning. In fact, his suspected real meaning was
dead-on. So let's try this again.

The word for round 1909 shall be:

+
++
+++
++++
+++++ REEZED
++++
+++
++
+

or reezed, case being irrelevant. If you know the word, notify me of your DQ
status as soon as possible. I expect to hear from Mr. Barrs, of course, but if
too many of you recognize the word we will have to start over again. I'll retain
the two defs already received from Dave and Toni unless they submit new ones.

Please send your made-up, fictitious, fallacious or hilarious definitions to me
by email at hello * isanybodyhome.com before the deadline, below. If you're new
to the game and are interested in playing, do NOT look up or google the word.
Instead, read the rules in the Coryphaeus Yahoogroups file area or the sticky
messages in tapcis.com's The Parlor section.

The deadline for definition submissions shall be:

Sunday, 11:00pm EDT 25-May-2008
Sunday, 08:00pm PDT 25-May-2008
Monday, 04:00am BST 26-May-2008
Monday, 03:00pm NZ 26-May-2008
Monday 2008-05-26 0300Z

Dave Cunningham
May 24th, 2008, 05:49 PM
to double the letter _z_ in a word.

Dave (nad)

On May 24, 1:43*pm, Tony Abell <he... (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com> wrote:
> As most of you suspected, Johnny let the word out of the dictionary with his
> first-class Dixon this morning. *In fact, his suspected real meaning was
> dead-on. *So let's try this again.
>
> The word for round 1909 shall be:
>
> +
> ++
> +++
> ++++
> +++++ REEZED
> ++++
> +++
> ++
> +
>
> or reezed, case being irrelevant. If you know the word, notify me of your DQ
> status as soon as possible. I expect to hear from Mr. Barrs, of course, but if
> too many of you recognize the word we will have to start over again. I'll retain
> the two defs already received from Dave and Toni unless they submit new ones.
>
> Please send your made-up, fictitious, fallacious or hilarious definitions to me
> by email at hello * isanybodyhome.com before the deadline, below. If you're new
> to the game and are interested in playing, do NOT look up or google the word.
> Instead, read the rules in the Coryphaeus Yahoogroups file area or the sticky
> messages in tapcis.com's The Parlor section.
>
> The deadline for definition submissions shall be:
>
> Sunday, 11:00pm EDT 25-May-2008
> Sunday, 08:00pm PDT 25-May-2008
> Monday, 04:00am BST 26-May-2008
> Monday, 03:00pm NZ 26-May-2008
> Monday 2008-05-26 0300Z

Jim Hart
May 25th, 2008, 04:37 AM
> Monday, 03:00pm NZ 26-May-2008
> Monday 2008-05-26 0300Z

Not to mention 1pm here! Do we have any NZ players?

Jim
UTC+10

Tony Abell
May 25th, 2008, 11:04 AM
On 25-May-08 at 05:37 Jim Hart wrote:

> Not to mention 1pm here! Do we have any NZ players?

> Jim
> UTC+10

No. I knew there was one Southern Hemisphere player, but I couldn't remember exactly
where, so I made a wild guess. I was only about 3000 km off.

Dodi Schultz
May 25th, 2008, 11:43 AM
>> I knew there was one Southern Hemisphere player, but I couldn't
>> remember exactly where, so I made a wild guess. I was only about
>> 3000 km off.

That's Jim, who's in Melbourne.

Didn't we very briefly have a player in New Zealand? Another former CIS
sysop, I think. Anybody recall?

Currently, we've seven players outside the US--in addition to Jim, they're
three in England, two in the Netherlands, and one in Canada.

BTW, Tony, your message above came through in plaintext--but your
"progress" note about defs DIDN'T. How come? Do you send Dixonary messages
two different ways?

--Dodi

Tony Abell
May 25th, 2008, 03:02 PM
On 25-May-08 at 12:43 Dodi Schultz wrote:

> BTW, Tony, your message above came through in plaintext--but your
> "progress" note about defs DIDN'T. How come? Do you send Dixonary messages
> two different ways?

They are sent to the list in plain text and plain text ONLY. We already have determined
that a quoted-printable transfer encoding is not the culprit.

Instead, it may be the content-type. My client seems to reply to mail using the same
content-type as the parent, usually ISO-8859-1 (Latin-1), which gives your CS account no
problems. But I've just discovered that for new messages it's choosing ISO-8859-15
(Latin-9) and quoted-printable. Such messages probably always turn into "binary"
attachments.

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any way to control that behavior (and I'm quite
surprised by this limitation).

Dodi Schultz
May 25th, 2008, 05:57 PM
>> My client seems to reply to mail using the same content-type as the
>> parent, usually ISO-8859-1 (Latin-1), which gives your CS account no
>> problems. But I've just discovered that for new messages it's
>> choosing ISO-8859-15 (Latin-9) and quoted-printable. Such messages
>> probably always turn into "binary" attachments.
>>
>> Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any way to control that
>> behavior (and I'm quite surprised by this limitation).

Me, too, Tony. I thought that ANY e-mail client could be told to send
plaintext, whatever else they do. (Some ALSO send along a binary version,
likely HTML, in addition to regular plaintext; I get that from all of my
AOL correspondents. But at least they do send plaintext.)

--Dodi

Paul Keating
May 26th, 2008, 03:35 PM
Dodi,

The difficulty is that quoted-printable _is_ plaintext. RFC 1522 says so.
CompuServe classes it as binary, but it shouldn't.

--
Paul Keating
The Hague

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dodi Schultz" <SCHULTZ (AT) compuserve (DOT) com>

>> Me, too, Tony. I thought that ANY e-mail client could be told to send
plaintext, whatever else they do.

Dodi Schultz
May 26th, 2008, 04:56 PM
>> The difficulty is that quoted-printable _is_ plaintext. RFC 1522
>> says so. CompuServe classes it as binary, but it shouldn't.

Paul, I think that the problem has now been nicely solved by Tony.

--Dodi

Paul Keating
May 26th, 2008, 05:35 PM
Well, yes, until the next time one of us accidentally puts an en-dash in a
message instead of a hyphen, or a double quote instead of an inch-mark. CIS
are filtering out perfectly standards-conformant plaintext because they
decided that a couple of stray = signs at the ends of folded-back long lines
turn a message into binary.

--
Paul Keating
The Hague

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dodi Schultz" <SCHULTZ (AT) compuserve (DOT) com>

>> Paul, I think that the problem has now been nicely solved by Tony.

Tony Abell
May 26th, 2008, 07:16 PM
Quoted-printable is indeed plain text. By itself, it does not seem to be what triggers a
binary attachment. The culprits were my messages being sent with a character set of Latin-9
(ISO 8859-15), to which my Hello account was mysteriously set. Even Latin-9 is still plain
text, but CompuServe doesn't pretend to understand any character sets but US ASCII and
Latin-1. Anything else seems to be delivered to Dodi as a binary attachment.

Note that this occurs despite there not being any special characters in the messages, just
ASCII. The declared content type of 'text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15"' in the headers is
evidently sufficient.

------------------------------------------
On 26-May-08 at 16:35 Paul Keating wrote:


> Dodi,

> The difficulty is that quoted-printable _is_ plaintext. RFC 1522 says so.
> CompuServe classes it as binary, but it shouldn't.

> --
> Paul Keating
> The Hague

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dodi Schultz" <SCHULTZ (AT) compuserve (DOT) com>

>>> Me, too, Tony. I thought that ANY e-mail client could be told to send
> plaintext, whatever else they do.

Guerri Stevens
May 26th, 2008, 08:00 PM
One effect of your change is that your messages, as I receive them in
Thunderbird, are wrapped badly. It's as though the lines were a certain
length with hard returns at the end, and my settings (if any) are
wrapping at a shorter length. Most messages come through OK, and yours
used to.

Don't waste any time on this, though. I can read what you're saying!

Guerri

Tony Abell wrote:
>
> Quoted-printable is indeed plain text...

Tony Abell
May 26th, 2008, 08:54 PM
All the messages I get on this list have hard line feeds, usually at somewhere
between 76-80 characters. I recently increased my word wrap width from 80 to 90
characters, because 90 looks better in my other accounts. Unfortunately, that is
a global setting, so it affected Dixonary as well. I have reluctantly gone back
to 80 characters.

I'm surprised anything other than a DOS program would force a line break at some
fixed column. Can't you make the long line/short line syndrome go away by
widening the window (or shrinking the font, though that may be undesirable for
other reasons)?

------------------------------------------
On 26-May-08 at 21:00 Guerri Stevens wrote:


> One effect of your change is that your messages, as I receive them in
> Thunderbird, are wrapped badly. It's as though the lines were a certain
> length with hard returns at the end, and my settings (if any) are
> wrapping at a shorter length. Most messages come through OK, and yours
> used to.

> Don't waste any time on this, though. I can read what you're saying!

> Guerri

> Tony Abell wrote:
>>
>> Quoted-printable is indeed plain text...

Paul Keating
May 27th, 2008, 01:27 AM
It isn't anything to do with DOS. Mail clients wrap long lines because
RFC1521 says that gateways don't have to be able to handle lines longer than
1000 characters.

If all of your _real_ line breaks (CR/LF pairs) are encoded =A0D=0A (and so
no longer look like line breaks to a gateway) then the client must introduce
line "soft" breaks to ensure that the 1000 character limit isn't breached.
RFC 1521 says that quoted-printable must do this after 76 characters.

It looks like The Bat! is a bit overenthusiastic about this, but what it is
doing is perfectly standard.

--
Paul Keating
The Hague


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Abell" <hello (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com>
To: "Guerri Stevens" <Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:54 AM
Subject: [Dixonary] Re: Round 1909 - New Word: REEZED


> I'm surprised anything other than a DOS program would force a line break
at some
> fixed column.

Guerri Stevens
May 27th, 2008, 06:05 AM
Yes, widening the window fixes the line wrapping. The message from you
mentioning that didn't have the odd wrapping, possibly because you had
just changed your own settings.

Guerri

Tony Abell wrote:
> I'm surprised anything other than a DOS program would force a line break at some
> fixed column. Can't you make the long line/short line syndrome go away by
> widening the window (or shrinking the font, though that may be undesirable for
> other reasons)?