Anyway, Mulberry identities provide a more flexible mechanism for processing certain sender-centric mail actions than the all-too-common method of configuring “dummy” accounts.

But your right, just selecting the one you want in the top right works too!

Having whizzed by http://www.dotfive.com/ the other day, I knew that you would know about branding ;-)

I solve this “signature for identity” problem within the one account by manually chosing the right sig for one of three aliases from the drop down box in the Compose window.

It’s not a huge hassle. Not many of my emails require a signature. And, doing this way, the ones that do, get just the sig they need.

However, in your case, your sites seem to be a mesh of personal and business, so you may be looking to do a ’9rules/whitespace’ interaction. The majority of businesses and professionals would not want that comparison.

The example without graphical dividers is an unattractive example, from a typography point of view. Placing spacer characters in between can also be an annoyance, especially on screen readers who don’t take to sounding them off nicely.

?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú
Alex King

http://www.alexking.org http://www.kingdesign.net http://www.feedlounge.com

If it were my signature, then having the reader recognise it as a URL would be sufficient, even if the mail client didn’t (especially since I’m unlikely to know what capabilities the reader’s mail client has). “www” is shorter than “http://”, however (as above).

Don’t people need to know what FeedLounge/KingDesign are with any of the variants? (except for the original non-combined version of FeedLounge). A good branding tool needs to be tailored to the audience, which is completely opposite to the whole combining concept (he’d be better off getting in the habit of inserting the correct sig manually, perhaps using some sort of auto-insert utility).

There really is little point in the ?¢‚Ǩ?ìhttp:?¢‚Ǩ¬ù – what protocol do people really expect?

But you would need to include the www in order for Mail.app to recognise it as a URL and render it as clickable (which is the point of including it, isn’t it?)

I see the virtue of the minimalist wide version, but is it a good branding tool? People need to know what feedlounge and kingdesign are already.

“”"
–
Alex King

alexking.org kingdesign.net feedlounge.com
“”"

(There really is little point in the “http:” – what protocol do people really expect?). Even if the font reduces the four spaces to a very small gap, it’ll still be obvious (a semi-colon could be used instead of the spaces, which looks equally good).

Note that a signature should start with two dashes, then a space, then start the actual sig on the next line.

Those pipe characters, which look so lovely in a monospaced font, will end up ragged and hard to read in many proportionational fonts.

Go tall!