At 11:22 AM 2/21/99 +0100, Nicolas Brouard wrote:
>Some mailers were able to send both ASCII and HTML in the same message
>(Netscape and Outlook Express at least). Now we have to go a step further
>and instead of sending both formats, plain text mailers should be able to
>decode HTML messages directly, suppressing the markups and keeping the
>visual structure that a 80 (or 132 columms or Xterm) screen allows.
Any time I read "should be", I get worried. Users should be able to write
filters. Many ARE able to write filters. They don't. They should, they can,
but they just don't. Why? Because they don't think they _should_ have to.
The war of the should bes. I'm about to write my own filter for this thread,
which will never be solved.
Remember there are service providers like Juno that are going the other way:
They used to pass thru encoded data for you to post-process with munpack or
some other tool. Now they trap MIME and uuencode and send you a note saying
you have to pay for the privilege of receiving attachments. (Juno is free
email, receiving attachments costs a little, web access costs more.) Juno
became a major service provider overnight by providing completely free service
on wimpy PCs. NetZero now provides a better grade of service, but with more
intrusive ads. How long before Netzero follows Juno's lead and charges for
"extra" features? Dunno. Maybe never. But when the cost of service is tied
to the kind of mail received, I can't say "should" with confidence.
My lists bounce HTML and attachments. I encourage posting of URLs.
Two clicks and you're there without wasting list server bandwidth.
SRE
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.climber.org/eckert/
Info on peak climbing email lists mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise
enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.
- Edward Abbey
