Hi. On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:35:33AM +0900, John Crawley wrote: > On 2019-07-10 01:52, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 06:48:22PM +0200, mjonsson1...@gmail.com wrote: > > > <html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" > > > xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" > > > xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"; > > > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40";><head><meta > > > http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta > > > name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered > > > medium)"><style><!-- > > > > Please post only text, not HTML. If your email agent *cannot* do plain > > text alone, at least configure it to send both plain text and HTML. Or, > > y'know, get a better email agent. > > > Of course text messages are best (and what I use all the time) but > surely a decent mail agent on the receiver's end will display that OK?
A subverted XHTML produced by Microsoft Word? You're joking, right? It will display *somehow*, that's for sure. But to display it as "intended" you'll need something from M$. > On Thunderbird the OP was perfectly readable, and I had no idea it > wasn't plain text till I checked the source. It was readable in my mutt too. Still does not make it right. Reco
