Because HTML was never designed to be used in email. It bloats the size of
the email message and takes up bandwidth for non-essential data.
I guess it comes from using the internet and Fidonet many moons ago, when
2400 baud modems were speed-demons and 300/300 or even 1200/75 was more
like the norm. Anything you could do to squeeze the last few cps out of a
modem and keep the connection costs to a minimum was "a good thing". Over
here in the UK, every connected phone call costs me cold hard cash. I don't
have the luxury of a DSL modem or even a cable link. Local phone-calls cost
me as soon as they connect.
HTML is not neccessary for email. I can strip it out of the email after
I've downloaded it, but by then it's too late - I've already paid to
download it!
When communicate with someone via email I want to be able to type in some
text, and have it delivered. Ideally, the manner in which the message is
rendered to the other party should be dependant upon /their/ browser. For
example, I want the word 'their' in that previous sentence to be rendered
to you in italics. I merely make a suggestion to the other parties email
package that I'd like to draw emphasis to that particular word. Here, it
displays as a slash, the word their and another slash. Anyone who was on
Fidonet and has used packages like Spot, April, Foozle, etc. will realise
what I mean!
I don't want my email package to display "VIAGRA AVAILABLE HERE" in 48
point Verdana, blue background and red flashing letters because someone
encases the thing in HTML. Ideally, I'd like it to be displayed in a
montoype font, my usual 10 point size, no colours and no special effects!
It's my choice! (Actually, I'd prefer it if the spam wasn't displayed at
all!)
HTML is absolutely great for web pages. Leave it there.
I'm not even going to go down the embedded javascript (and the security
implications that brings), gif and jpg attachments, attached midi files
that start playing, etc. etc. etc.
The only beneficial thing you can get from an email is the ability to click
on a link, fire up the web page and browse straight to it. Of course, I'm
not stupid and I can cut and paste the link just as easily. In fact, my
usual email package allows me to hit PF7 and all links are stripped from
the mesasge onscreen and placed into a seperate section of my bookmarks
folder.
Of course, I'm not mentioning that nearly every email package I've seen
which send html email always (at least) doubles the size of the message by
sending a plain text version and then sending the html'ised version
immediately after it. WTF is the idea behind that! I can read at least one
of them - don't send them both! Utterly brain-dead.
BTW, I'm using Lotus Notes here at work. It truly is terrible for email. I
can't control the quoting easily, I can't switch off attachments, etc. etc.
However, I don't have a choice :(
Steve Flynn
IBM MVS Operations Analyst
P.S. The record currently stands and 27k ot text for a mesage which
basically had 4 words of content. "Our baby is born" sent to me (and 48
other colleagues at work). The idiot who'd sent it had been composing it
in MS Outlook a few years ago and had messed about with placement, font
sizes, colours, backgrounds and all sorts of other stuff. It was full of
stuff like
<bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><smaller><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger>
and so on, before the information that this unfortunate pondlife had forced
a smaller version of himself upon the word, before doing the whole thing
all over again, with the </bigger> and </smaller> tags.
27K for the html version
16 bytes for the plain text version
49 times.
I'd be interested in why you think HTML is a necessity in your world. This
isn't a flame by the way - I'm genuinely interested in why you feel you
need it?
We're also totally off-topic and this has precious little to do with Linux
- best make it private.... unless people in here want to read it! :)
Alan Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 17/02/2000 15:44:00
Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: (bcc: Steve Flynn/UK/Contr/IBM)
Subject: Re: [[newbie] Can anyone recommend a good email program?]
John/Steve....In the world I compute/communicate in, HTML
messaging is close to being a necessity. In fact I LIKE being
able to send my 5 year old Granddaughter an email with a pink
background and white script as the font. Why, because SHE likes
it!! I LIKE being able to post a small face shot of myself at
the top of my emails (with a happy face background) to other
family members in other parts of the country. Why do you guys
WANT Kmail and other Linux mail clients to stay in the dark
ages!!!???
Alan
monashee wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Kmail not doing HTML can only be a good thing IMHO!
> >
> Amen to that!
> I am not much of an advocate for banning stuff but I can't
> figure out why people want email in HTML.
>
> Cheers
> John Montgomery
