1 |
Personally, I am for permitting HTML, or rich text email. I quite |
2 |
prefer to use rich mail. I am also judicious in it's use so it's not |
3 |
bloated like M$ mail. |
4 |
|
5 |
This list has very rabid anti-html users. They would rather pollute |
6 |
emails with a large amount of spaces to position their content and odd |
7 |
characters to represent barely decipherable graphic content than use a |
8 |
language designed for marking up and laying out the presentation. |
9 |
|
10 |
Eventually their kind will grow old and the younger generation will take |
11 |
over. They will go the way of the 74 column force wrapped emails who |
12 |
went the way of the 36 column force wrapped emails, etc, etc. |
13 |
|
14 |
All their excuses are entirely lame. All modern mailing list software can: |
15 |
|
16 |
a) reform mail from HTML to plain text |
17 |
b) archive both plain text and HTML mail just fine |
18 |
|
19 |
All modern MUAs can also present the end user with plain text |
20 |
representations of HTML or use the text/plain mime part instead of the |
21 |
text/html mime part whether it is native or by sub shell. |
22 |
|
23 |
This particular subject comes up several times a year and will continue to. |
24 |
|
25 |
HTML mail is neither ignorant nor non-standard but you will definitely |
26 |
have several people on this list lambast you as such. |
27 |
|
28 |
Further, I consider these people hypocrites since most of them run |
29 |
websites and use HTML markup. Why don't they make plain text web |
30 |
pages? Their content can be expressed just as stone age appearing as |
31 |
their text email is expressed. |
32 |
|
33 |
^_^ |
34 |
|
35 |
-david |
36 |
|
37 |
Ed W wrote: |
38 |
> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
39 |
>> |
40 |
>>> You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine... |
41 |
>>> |
42 |
>> |
43 |
>> which ive disabled so i dont have to deal with it. replies/quoting easily |
44 |
>> break and destroy followups. all so people can force their preferred viewing |
45 |
>> font on others. |
46 |
>> |
47 |
> |
48 |
> Actually, getting all technical on you for a moment, but at least in |
49 |
> theory HTML has the ability to properly support replies and quoting as |
50 |
> part of it's standard |
51 |
> |
52 |
> ...Absolutely with you though that the most popular MUA in most |
53 |
> circles is Outlook and this fails even to reply and create a proper |
54 |
> indent let alone using decent use of HTML tags... Oh well. |
55 |
> |
56 |
> Not really sure what Thunderbird does - it prompts sometimes and |
57 |
> othertimes does it's own thing.. Hope this is plain text? |
58 |
> |
59 |
>> if you want to make the argument on a non-technical list, go for it. open |
60 |
>> source technical lists (such as this one) have all banned html. get with it |
61 |
>> or dont post. |
62 |
> |
63 |
> |
64 |
> I already nailed my colours to the mast as someone who cares (remember |
65 |
> I serve customers with only 20KB/minute of bandwidth!) - I was |
66 |
> pointing out that this debate pops up time and time again and |
67 |
> basically it's like trying to hold back the tide... |
68 |
> |
69 |
> For what it's worth I have a very clever filtering setup as part of my |
70 |
> ISP arrangement which simply automatically converts html to plain text |
71 |
> and archives the original so that you can get it back again if you |
72 |
> need it, etc. I think if you really want plain text only then it's |
73 |
> far easier to just setup the mailing list to convert all mails |
74 |
> automatically than it is to try and badger users to change their habits... |
75 |
> |
76 |
> Personally I think this is a problem solvable by computer and I'm all |
77 |
> in favour of stuff where teh computer does the work rather than humans |
78 |
> having to press one more key just to do something (which is basically |
79 |
> also your complaint). I can point you towards some html flattener |
80 |
> software if you are the admin for this list? |
81 |
> |
82 |
> Good luck |
83 |
> |
84 |
> Ed W |
85 |
|
86 |
-- |
87 |
gentoo-embedded@l.g.o mailing list |