[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: HTML e-mail
At 12:03 -0500 14/2/98, D.I.G. wrote:
>How many folks on the list are still using e-mail software that is
>unable to receive "Rich Text" or HTML e-mail?
I'm using e-mail software quite capable of reading rich text
or HTML e-mail. I'd rather people didn't start sending it though.
There is little need for it, there is rarely any value to be added
to an e-mail with bold or coloured sections. Rich text and HTML
e-mails are frequently much larger than plain text, often with
content duplicated - and the huge extra bits microsoft mail sometimes
put on the end are even worse still.
The place for HTML is on a web page. Ditto images.
>As this is the new international standard for e-mail, you would be well
>advised (if possible) to obtain up-to-date software.
I doubt very much if it is even the soon to be de-facto standard -
certainly I've never seen any official document from an international
standards authority even suggesting this.
>If, however, there are HUGE numbers of folks who (because of University
>administration or other considerations) are stuck using software that
>they wouldn't wish on their worst enemy, perhaps the Listserver can be
>configured to strip it off.
Why go to a whole lot of effort to get the list serve to strip out
the HTML, rich text and god knows what (not as easy thing to do without
risking losing chunks of text) to pander to a few people who want
pink bold italic headlines.
I think it is up to those who would use HTML or rich text justify why
they need to do so.
Derek Tearne. --- @URL Internet Consultants --- http://url.co.nz
Some of the more environmentally aware dinosaurs were worried about the
consequences of an accident with the new Iridium enriched fusion reactor.
"If it goes off only the cockroaches and mammals will survive..." they said.