>I seem to be getting more and more messages in dual format
>plain/text and html/text on the lists I facilitate.
That's nice. We are encouraging people to share information not to force
them knowing this strange (-_<") email culture.
Structured texts (who knows on this list what are structured texts: only
LaTex users and yet SGML and HTML users) are a big improvement in the
comprehension of a long text (e-mails are short I agree).
>And is it reasonable to allow messages to be blown up
>to over 3 times their original size by the inclusion of html?
3 X is not a shame. Structured documents make you think 2 X faster !
(that's only provocative)
>Not on any lists I run. I filter all of them and return HTML, VCARD, RTF
>and
>similar garbage to their originators.
>
> Tom Coradeschi, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer
VCARD are not used because people don't feel them as necessary. Why should
you filter them out, they are so few...
RTF files are proprietary formats, much bigger (10 X or more) than HTML
documents, their use are most of time useless compared to HTML, and
therefore should be filtered or, better, "warned".
>There's no need to do this in the message itself (increasing its size
>and forcing the sender's choice of formatting on the reader): it can be
>handled in the client. For example, I'm using a client called mutt >which
>not only handles this task (by highlighting, in the colors of my choice,
>different levels of replies) but also will highlight selected headers,
>URLs, signatures, etc.
>
>---Rsk
>Rich Kulawiec
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can you tell us more on "mutt". It seems to simply decrypt a non-standard
language with replies, URLS, signatures etc (as GNU-emacs does for example,
in colors). In the near future, and if the mutt product is successful it
will be improved to decrypt a proprietary language. I do prefer an already
well-known simple markup language like SGML, or HTML if the latter is more
recent and spread.
Nicolas Brouard
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sauvy.ined.fr/~brouard
