Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote:
> In general, html email is mostly a "solution" in search of a problem,
> and it ends up causing trouble and being overall worse than the
> simple, efficient, easy, working, universally adopted technology that
> preceded it. Besides all the problems already listed in this
> discussion, html email facilitates malware, web bugs, phishing, spam,
> and incompatibility (besides the people who use HTML-incapable email
> clients, there are email clients that don't render HTML email well (it
> is more common then you think), not to mention that the HTML email
> itself is often broken).
>
> And of the HTML emails, a tiny minority actually make something useful
> of HTML, while the rest is either deliberately harmful or has a lot of
> "fancy" formating that looks it was created by a teenager.  Besides
> looking horrible, they are often harder to read.
>
> As for the guy who suggested a form of "sanitized HTML for email",
> maybe you would like
> "enriched text"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_text
>
>   

Someone who put it better than I could.  I use HTML elsewhere but out of
respect for the list and those who use it, I use text only, try not to
send anything huge and put links in a way that should work for
everybody.  Maybe I am just a pushover?  It's not like I own the list or
anything either.  :/

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply via email to