From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_04A9_01C72DE2.A02E82D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   Underscores for italics are a convention that predates thunderbird.  =
For one example, see =
http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Volunteers%27_FAQ#V.94._What_shou=
ld_I_do_with_italics.3F.   From what I read it appears the convention =
goes back to the days of typewriters where italics were indicated by =
underlining the text.

Rich

  "Gary Britt"  wrote
in message =
news:4599d4b0$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  Thanks and thanks to Greg as well.

  Gregg is right about this not being standard.  Thunderbird interprets =
the=20
  codes as indicated, but MS Word 2000 interprets _  _ as codes for =
italics.=20
  Certainly makes more sense for it to be underline.

  Thanks,

  Gary

  Ellen K. wrote:
  > I think _underline_ is underline and /italic/ is italic.
  >=20
  > On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 19:14:23 -0500, Gary Britt
  >  wrote in message
  > :
  >=20
  >> A while back somebody posted to me that using * as in *Bold This* =
provides a=20
  >> reader with noted emphasis and in some programs like Thunderbird =
and Word,=20
  >> etc. the words enclosed by * * actually appear as bold.  Also, I =
remember=20
  >> _Italic_ turns stuff into italics in word, but what is the code for =
underline.
  >>
  >> In this same message the codes for underline and italics were also=20
  >> mentioned, but I've lost my reference to them.  Could somebody =
please post=20
  >> the equivalent codes to *This is Bold* for italics and underline?
  >>
  >> Thanks,
  >>
  >> Gary
  >
------=_NextPart_000_04A9_01C72DE2.A02E82D0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








  
Underscores for italics =
are a=20
convention that predates thunderbird.  For one example, see
http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Volunteers%27_FAQ#V.94._W=
hat_should_I_do_with_italics.3F">http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:=
Volunteers%27_FAQ#V.94._What_should_I_do_with_italics.3F.  =
=20
From what I read it appears the convention goes back to the days of = typewriters=20
where italics were indicated by underlining the text.
 
Rich
 

  "Gary Britt" <GaryNOSPAMBritt{at}genera=">mailto:GaryNOSPAMBritt{at}generalcogster.com">GaryNOSPAMBritt{at}genera=
lcogster.com>=20
  wrote in message news:4599d4b0$1{at}w3.nls.net...Thanks=20
  and thanks to Greg as well.Gregg is right about this
not being =

  standard.  Thunderbird interprets the codes as indicated, but =
MS Word=20
  2000 interprets _  _ as codes for italics. Certainly makes =
more sense=20
  for it to be
underline.Thanks,GaryEllen
K.=20
  wrote:> I think _underline_ is underline and /italic/ is=20
  italic.> > On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 19:14:23
-0500, Gary=20
  Britt> <GaryNOSPAMBritt{at}genera=">mailto:GaryNOSPAMBritt{at}generalcogster.com">GaryNOSPAMBritt{at}genera=
lcogster.com>=20
  wrote in message> <4599a64e$1{at}w3.nls.net>:&=">mailto:4599a64e$1{at}w3.nls.net">4599a64e$1{at}w3.nls.net>:&=
gt;=20
  >> A while back somebody posted to me that using * as in =
*Bold This*=20
  provides a >> reader with noted emphasis and in some =
programs like=20
  Thunderbird and Word, >> etc. the words enclosed by * * =
actually=20
  appear as bold.  Also, I remember >>
_Italic_ turns =
stuff into=20
  italics in word, but what is the code for =
underline.>>>>=20
  In this same message the codes for underline and italics were also=20
  >> mentioned, but I've lost my reference to
them.  =
Could=20
  somebody please post >> the equivalent codes to *This is =
Bold* for=20
  italics and underline?>>>> =
Thanks,>>>>=20
  Gary>

------=_NextPart_000_04A9_01C72DE2.A02E82D0--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5