Chuq wrote:
> At 7:04 PM -0600 2/8/2000, Mike Avery wrote:
> > Also, many people have email clients that
> > won't support html - people in companies with mini's or mainframes
> > and dumb terminals, for example.
>
> Rapidly hitting the same level as lynx browsers for HTTP. there's
> been a huge shift in the last six months here. Six months ago, I'd
> have probably agreed with you. today -- not nearly as true.
I think there is also a shift towards people accessing the internet
and their email from more than one platform, which increases the
chance that one will want to read email with a non-html-enabled reader
at some point in time. I myself read variously from a fully networked
PC, a dial-up ppp linux box, telnet via AOL connection at family
members house, one friend's house who only runs Windows 3.1 and
doesn't want to install PPP-type software (so I dial in direct
to the unix shell), and another friend with a new mac. Some are
capable of html, some not, but to preserve access, I use MH from the
unix shell to read mail.
Certainly, though, there is a much larger proportion of new internet
user now who only access the internet from one or two points and have
the newest programs. I am seriously considering something like demime
(should I be able to get it working) instead of doing what I do now
(which is reject html postings and advise the poster to send plain
text). That is indeed starting to become frequent enough that I want
to change the way I handle such mail. Converting to text, rather than
rejecting it would be much more graceful and useful to all.
--
Michelle Dick [EMAIL PROTECTED] East Palo Alto, CA
