| 1 |
Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote: |
| 2 |
> In general, html email is mostly a "solution" in search of a problem, |
| 3 |
> and it ends up causing trouble and being overall worse than the |
| 4 |
> simple, efficient, easy, working, universally adopted technology that |
| 5 |
> preceded it. Besides all the problems already listed in this |
| 6 |
> discussion, html email facilitates malware, web bugs, phishing, spam, |
| 7 |
> and incompatibility (besides the people who use HTML-incapable email |
| 8 |
> clients, there are email clients that don't render HTML email well (it |
| 9 |
> is more common then you think), not to mention that the HTML email |
| 10 |
> itself is often broken). |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> And of the HTML emails, a tiny minority actually make something useful |
| 13 |
> of HTML, while the rest is either deliberately harmful or has a lot of |
| 14 |
> "fancy" formating that looks it was created by a teenager. Besides |
| 15 |
> looking horrible, they are often harder to read. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> As for the guy who suggested a form of "sanitized HTML for email", |
| 18 |
> maybe you would like |
| 19 |
> "enriched text" |
| 20 |
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_text |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Someone who put it better than I could. I use HTML elsewhere but out of |
| 25 |
respect for the list and those who use it, I use text only, try not to |
| 26 |
send anything huge and put links in a way that should work for |
| 27 |
everybody. Maybe I am just a pushover? It's not like I own the list or |
| 28 |
anything either. :/ |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Dale |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
:-) :-) |
Archives