| 1 |
lordsauronthegreat@×××××.com wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Monday 01 May 2006 11:14 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote: |
| 3 |
>> lordsauronthegreat@×××××.com wrote: |
| 4 |
>> > On Sunday 30 April 2006 11:21 am, Alexander Skwar wrote: |
| 5 |
>> >> Kesara Rathnayake wrote: |
| 6 |
>> >> > I guess Firefox is slow now because of whole lot of Extentions that we |
| 7 |
>> >> > used today. |
| 8 |
>> >> |
| 9 |
>> >> To find out, I asked OP to create a blank profile. I also assume |
| 10 |
>> >> a local problem at his side. OP should simply create a new profile |
| 11 |
>> >> and report back. |
| 12 |
>> >> |
| 13 |
>> >> Alexander Skwar |
| 14 |
>> >> |
| 15 |
>> >> PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML |
| 16 |
>> >> even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time. |
| 17 |
>> > |
| 18 |
>> > I used the GMail web interface for a long time and it defaulted to plain |
| 19 |
>> > text for me. |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> This might be correct. However on new accounts, HTML is used. |
| 22 |
>> If you don't believe me, simply create a new account, and you'll |
| 23 |
>> see. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> I'm not contending with you there. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Well, but you are contradiciting what I say. So, yes, in a sense, |
| 28 |
you ARE contending with me. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
>> >> Another thing that sucks, is that HTML mails are permitted on this |
| 31 |
>> >> list. Why not just dump the HTML part (and every other attachment)? |
| 32 |
>> > |
| 33 |
>> > Why not, |
| 34 |
>> |
| 35 |
>> Makes mails larger, without adding anything useful (normally). |
| 36 |
>> Further, it makes mails a bit harder to read and harder to |
| 37 |
>> quote. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> At this point I'm inclined to think you're using an inferior mail client. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Aha, why's that? |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
> KMail works just fine with HTML. What are you using? |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Thunderbird - as you can see in the header of my mails. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
>> eg. the mail which I quoted: In HTML, it's about 1179 bytes. In |
| 48 |
>> text/plain, it is 729 bytes. And actually, the HTML caused |
| 49 |
>> overhead is even more, as the 2nd MIME part (the HTML part) |
| 50 |
>> caused additional headers to be added. Those are an additional |
| 51 |
>> 378 bytes. |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> Yah, I agree with you that it's unnecessarily wasting space to use HTML. |
| 54 |
> That's why I don't use it. However, I don't think it's right or polite to |
| 55 |
> start harrassing people for using it. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Yes, it is. It is, as HTML posters are making other people receive |
| 58 |
the HTML junk, even if those receivers do not want that. It's just |
| 59 |
plain arrogant and, yes, it is most certainly okay to harras |
| 60 |
arrogant egoists. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
>> > if it irks you so much, make a script that will change RTF/HTML to |
| 63 |
>> > Plaintext? |
| 64 |
>> |
| 65 |
>> That's not a useful advice. I'd have to accept the (normally) |
| 66 |
>> uselessly bloated mail first and then strip it. Makes no sense. |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
> No, you're not thinking! |
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
Yes, I am. |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
> The mailing list server receives a email in HTML. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
That's not what you wrote. You suggested, that I make a script. |
| 75 |
This script can only run on a system which I control. |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
> Convert the HTML to plaintext. |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
And overwrite a text/plain part? |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
Besides: See why it's arrogant of those HTML users to send mails |
| 82 |
in HTML? They are making other people have to think about writing |
| 83 |
programs, so that the mails can be converted. |
| 84 |
|
| 85 |
That's not necessary if people would just use text/plain mails. |
| 86 |
|
| 87 |
Alexander Skwar |
| 88 |
-- |
| 89 |
No poet or novelist wishes he was the only one who ever lived, but most of |
| 90 |
them wish they were the only one alive, and quite a number fondly believe |
| 91 |
their wish has been granted. |
| 92 |
-- W.H. Auden, "The Dyer's Hand" |
| 93 |
-- |
| 94 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives