Regarding the following, written by "John Long" on 2019-10-31 at 10:30 Uhr +0000:
1. Commonly done != standard. There are standards for things like MIME, POP3, IMAP etc. I'm not aware of ANSI, ISO, IETF standards that say that HTML email is a thing.
Quoting the HTML RFC from 1995: "The Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) is a simple markup language used to create hypertext documents that are platform independent. HTML documents are SGML documents with generic semantics that are appropriate for representing information from a wide range of domains. HTML markup can represent hypertext news, **mail**, documentation, and hypermedia; …"
So yes, HTML was designed pretty much from the start to be used for mail.
And then "MIME" came along. Which is a standard, and RFC 2854 makes text/html a standard.
Anyway, none of this is relevant, because:
2. Mutt hasn't had HTML support
… and won't get HTML support. We're working on the ability to create multipart/alternative containers.
I am going to stop participating in this "HTML is good or bad for Email" debate, and I'd like to invite you all to consider doing the same.
-- @martinkrafft | https://riot.im/app/#/room/#madduck:madduck.neta Hooloovoo is a superintelligent shade of the color blue.
-- douglas adams, "the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy"
spamtraps: madduck.bo...@madduck.net
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital GPG signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
