At 12:25 AM 2002-03-09 -0500, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>If everyone seems to want to filter them out of mailing lists, perhaps
>there's some moral in that.
I wrote a program called "demime" that lives in a pipe ahead of all my
lists. It strips out mime, leaving plain text, removing attachments,
> "Jay" == Jay R Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes re HTML email:
Jay> which is inherent, I think, in the (lack of) design thereof.
What lack of design? It's a near-perfect implementation of "form over
substance."
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.t
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 03:01:10PM -0800, James J. Besemer wrote:
> "Jay R. Ashworth" wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:40:11AM -0800, James J. Besemer wrote:
> > > While, OTOH I agree these more robust formats are the future, it's
> > > insane to force them on users and not allow them to turn
At 08:52 PM 04/03/02 -0800, James J. Besemer wrote:
>4. It would be nice to reuse the existing list security as an umbrealla to
>cover
>other arbitrary, list-members-only web pages. E.g., some listers hate large
>graphics attachments (and they are problematic generally). I'd like to
>remove th
At 15:01 -0800 3/8/2002, James J. Besemer wrote:
>However you characterize them, don't you agree they "are the future"
>(which was
>the main point of my sentence)? For better or worse, I detect an inexorable
>trend.
Trend, yes. Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but I don't think "inexorable."
Cou
"Jay R. Ashworth" wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:40:11AM -0800, James J. Besemer wrote:
> > While, OTOH I agree these more robust formats are the future, it's
> > insane to force them on users and not allow them to turn them off.
>
> As someone who reads half of my mail in Mutt in a vt scre
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 05:18:49PM -0800, James J. Besemer wrote:
> Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>
> > First step is -- "I run this list, this is how I plan on running it, and if
> > you insist on yelling about this stuff on the list, I'll kick YOU off
> > first."
>
> I don't agree, certainly not wit
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:40:11AM -0800, James J. Besemer wrote:
> Les Niles wrote:
> > (It was the release of AOL 6.0, which doesn't allow
> > turning off HTML, that prompted me.)
>
> Exactly.
>
> While, OTOH I agree these more robust formats are the future, it's
> insane to force them on user
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 10:33:40AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Not hard to do in MM2.1, but I doubt I'll accept much extension in
> this area. The whole backend user database will be rewritten in a
> future version and IMO, such extra information ought to be kept in an
> external database l
Les Niles wrote:
> Translation systems, whether speech recognition, natural language
> translation, or reformatting the content of email, are
> fundamentally imperfect. That's why worrying about making an HTML
> filter intuitive and easily configurable is important -- those
> attributes are exa
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002 00:20:26 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Barry A. Warsaw) wrote:
>Here's the basic problem: there are lots of different use cases that
>fall under the rubric "filtering HTML". Some people want it stripped,
>some want it transformed, do we preserve links, etc, etc. It's hard
>to suppo
"Barry A. Warsaw" wrote:
> Here's the basic problem: there are lots of different use cases that
> fall under the rubric "filtering HTML". Some people want it stripped,
> some want it transformed, do we preserve links, etc, etc. It's hard
> to support everything everyone wants to do with HTML m
> "JJB" == James J Besemer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> You'd think! I've had a couple of patches contributed that
>> filter out HTML, but I've not been able to whip them into shape
>> for inclusion. I've basically given up hope for MM2.1, but
>> will look at it again for
Title: Re: [Mailman-Developers] Please Allow Me To Introduce Myself...
On 3/6/02 6:03 PM, "John W Baxter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My solution is simple for mailing lists: if a message is hard to read, I
> don't read it (unless it seems to answer a question I p
At 16:14 -0800 3/6/2002, James J. Besemer wrote:
>Another faction doesn't object to HTML per se except that the text in such
>messages (for them)
>appear in too small a font and they can't figure out how to change it.
Happens to me a lot since I read mail on my Macs, and a sensible size on a
Wind
Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> First step is -- "I run this list, this is how I plan on running it, and if
> you insist on yelling about this stuff on the list, I'll kick YOU off
> first."
I don't agree, certainly not with this issue.
More generally -- the list IS the members -- not the admin or to
On 3/6/02 4:14 PM, "James J. Besemer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As the host, I'd like to solve the problem if I can. Someday...
First step is -- "I run this list, this is how I plan on running it, and if
you insist on yelling about this stuff on the list, I'll kick YOU off
first."
There co
John W Baxter wrote:
> I suspect that sending a few blank messages to a list and being chastised
> for it would be sufficient training for some.
Yes, for some. ;o)
I think my situation is that there is a very vocal minority who hate HTML and there is
a similarly sized minority who can't figu
At 11:22 -0800 3/6/2002, Les Niles wrote:
>Most of the time you really can just strip out the HTML. AOL,
>Outhouse, and most of the other clients that like to generate HTML
>put out multipart/alternative messages that include a text/plain
>section, so picking out the latter and dropping the other
Les Niles wrote:
> (It was the release of AOL 6.0, which doesn't allow
> turning off HTML, that prompted me.)
Exactly.
While, OTOH I agree these more robust formats are the future, it's insane to force
them on users and not allow them to turn them off.
--jb
--
James J. Besemer 503-280-0838
On Wed, 06 Mar 2002 11:01:51 -0800 "James J. Besemer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> You'd think! I've had a couple of patches contributed that filter out
>> HTML, but I've not been able to whip them into shape for inclusion.
>> I've basically given up hope for MM2.1, b
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Cool! Since I'm strapped for time right now, I'm just going to
> comment briefly.
Thanks for the various pointers. Dunno how long before I'll be productive
(read Dangerous ;o).
> You'd think! I've had a couple of patches contributed that filter out
> HTML, but I'v
> "JJB" == James J Besemer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JJB> I recently started running a relatively small mailing list
JJB> using Mailman and am quite happy with it. I am a proficient
JJB> Python developer and the fact that Mailman is Python-based
JJB> was one reason I chose
[... I'm a man of wealth and taste...]
I recently started running a relatively small mailing list using Mailman and am
quite happy with it. I am a proficient Python developer and the fact that Mailman
is Python-based was one reason I chose it with entheusiasm. I hope that in my
spare time I'll
24 matches
Mail list logo
