From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: org-export-select-tags Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 20:54:05 -0400 Message-ID: <9089.1341881645@alphaville> References: <6745.1341869940@alphaville> <7268.1341871994@alphaville> Reply-To: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54417) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SoOiW-0004GL-En for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 20:54:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SoOiU-0006Q0-P7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 20:54:16 -0400 Received: from g1t0027.austin.hp.com ([15.216.28.34]:30195) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SoOiU-0006PR-Ju for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 20:54:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: Message from suvayu ali of "Tue, 10 Jul 2012 02:31:55 +0200." List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: suvayu ali Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, SW suvayu ali wrote: > Hello all, > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Nick Dokos wrote: > > > > o post an ECM to begin with - no ifs, ands or buts. > > o post what you tested *exactly*. > > o test what you (or somebody else) posted *exactly* as it was posted. > > A comment with regards to the above; from the experience in this thread > it seems posting an ECM is better done as a plain text attachment rather > than inline quoted regions. After all getting from inline quoted regions > to working examples require human intervention which, as we saw, is > prone to errors. ;) > If the human intervention is the problem, then I would advocate education, rather than attachments, as the solution: after all there is nothing that would stop that kind of intervention *after* the attachment has been saved. But in the face of more and more idiotic mail software out there that mangles messages irredeemably, I will reluctantly agree: I'm still old fashioned enough to prefer inline quoting, but I have been known to repost something as an attachment if the inline post gets mangled. Nick