| 1 |
Stroller ha scritto: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 22 Dec 2008, at 12:59, b.n. wrote: |
| 4 |
>> ... |
| 5 |
>>> I don't know what you mean by using the adjective "cold" in relation to |
| 6 |
>>> the communication error that your mailer posts HTML by default. You |
| 7 |
>>> should file an upstream bug about that with whomever supplies it. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Why is posting HTML mail a bug? I don't like HTML mail and I try to |
| 10 |
>> avoid it as much as possible, but there is nothing intrinsically "wrong" |
| 11 |
>> in HTML mail. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> It's a bug because it annoys people. It only tends to annoy me when the |
| 14 |
> sender has set the text to a size which is unreadable or intrusive on my |
| 15 |
> monitor (a size which is undoubtedly perfect on the sender's 800x600 |
| 16 |
> monitor), but it appears to annoy other people more. That there's scope |
| 17 |
> for us to have this discussion demonstrates that it's simply better to |
| 18 |
> post plain-text to mailing lists. Mailers should default to plain text |
| 19 |
> unless the user explicitly chooses otherwise. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Is your browser rendering everything as plain text? |
| 23 |
Do you think it is a bug for web servers to serve HTML? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
We, technically minded people, could find HTML annoying, but most of the |
| 26 |
world thinks formatting emails with fancy fonts and colors is nicer, or |
| 27 |
at least they don't care. So many email clients (OSS ones too) default |
| 28 |
to HTML. We -the plain text fans- are the weird ones. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
m. |
Archives