On 12 Feb 99, at 21:22, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> In reality, the e-mail world is changing, so that at some point, I'll
> be accepting HTML and MIME stuff on my lists. it's not my preference,
> but I can see this will be a reality.
You think that? This seems to me to be at least the third [fourth?]
attempt at "better than plain text" [BBN had some scheme years ago [I
forget the details now], MS had RTF, MS also had the hated "winpmail.dat"
formatting info glued on, etc]. And looking back over the failed
attempts, it is hard to see that html ought to be the one to succeed:
Just IMO, of course, but HTML is a truly awful page description language.
Overcomplicated, too hard to process, too non-compact. At the limits, it
is nearly impossible to do HTML "right" [unless you're a full-blown
browser and are online as you read your email], and even then it gets
touchy [you get an email message with a RealAudio clip? OR a Java
applet? Or with hyperlinks to off-site "chunks". CSS's in email?]
I realize this is just random whining, but there's a sort-of dual
question here:
Is HTML-email really on the way, or will this just [one hopes!] prove to
be another failed attempt to move email beyond "just text". I despise
HTML email so much that I try to make believe it isn't there, so I don't
have a good feel for what's really happening.
If it really *is* coming, is there any hope to get some rational subset
of HTML defined and perhaps head off true chaos? [you're all aware, I
suspect, that no two browsers display HTML in quite the same way, which
is hardly [IMO] a suitable standard for transmitting email.] Hell, even
RTF would've been a better choice...
Oh, well... I'm not typically a luddite, but I guess I'm going to be
among the kicking-and-screaming resisters of HTML email.
/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep <--
