Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
--snip--
With HTML, *you* get to choose which font *I* have to read your messages
in. What if I happen to hate that font?
Doesn't the selection use my fonts, overiding page specific fonts
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 21:21:17 -0500, Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andreas Sikkema wrote:
Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the
newgroup(s) netscape.public.mozilla.general:
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 05:19:46 +1100, Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok. I'm gone.
Wonderful.
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 02:56:48 +1100, Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm, well let's see. We could ask a mailer to auto-send as plain text if
there's no formatting or if size to actual text content is some ratio...
but why bother? In programming some time ago we used to use bits in
bytes for
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 01:42:42 +1100, Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
Myself said:
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I want to know. It's
clear there are people religous about it so I'd like to understand why
some people think mail and newsgroups must
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
I have to remember evidently that US phone Companies and ISP's
apparently are the only ones in the world that pay for Service per
month, rather than per minute.
Here in the UK, there's a mixed bag of choices.
Christian Biesinger wrote:
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
How is DSL Broadband setup overseas?
Here (Austria/Europe), you have (for DSL) basically two options: You can
either pay a lower monthly fee and are limited to 1 GB of data transfer,
or you pay more and get an unlimited
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
Christian Biesinger wrote:
How is DSL Broadband setup overseas?
Here (Austria/Europe), you have (for DSL) basically two options: You can
either pay a lower monthly fee and are limited to 1 GB of data transfer,
or you pay more and get an unlimited transfer.
Rob Allen wrote:
--snip
I was responding generically to the question about the amount of bytes
used in an email/news message, rather than the specifics of Moz
development. However, even there, I do get bugzilla reports as email
when I connect via my mobile (i.e.
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:30:11 -0500, Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
--snip--
With HTML, *you* get to choose which font *I* have to read your messages
in. What if I happen to hate that font?
--
/Jonas
On Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:52:36 -0500, Scott I. Remick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a world where more and more people want to receive their email on
PDAs, pagers, and cell phones, there is less and less place for the
bloat of HTML email.
If you're message can't be conveyed in simple plain-text
Pratik wrote:
On 01/23/02 10:01 AM, Pratik wrote:
On 01/23/02 09:48 AM, Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
---snip-
If you don't use any special formatting, what's the point in using
RTF/HTML rather than plaintext?
--
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
--snip
I can see the usefullness of making text bold or italic. But HTML for
email also allows the sender to specify ugly fonts, sizes, colors,
background colors, margins, images, and a lot of other things which,
when
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
--snip--
With HTML, *you* get to choose which font *I* have to read your messages
in. What if I happen to hate that font?
--
/Jonas
'Open Systems' means no fences. And no fences means no use for Gates.
- Sun Microsystems
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
The specification for the font you see is set up in your newsreader.
[...]
In the mail and news reader you have control over the most of the fonts
you view.
No, with HTML mail, the specification for the font I see (if you were
trying to make the word you
Pratik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
1. OE mails being displayed in utterly small fonts. Hence I feel the
need to be able to view it as plaintext. A button somewhere would be
excellent. Most mails that I do get from OE/Outlook don't contain any
special rich
Myself wrote:
Christian Biesinger wrote:
And you can't even delete a message in Mozilla without having it
displayed.
Why? If you switch off the bottom mailnews pane (the view pane) and then
delete the message it is not read. Surely moz doesn't read it anyway...?
Good Point, I never had
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
How is DSL Broadband setup overseas?
Here (Austria/Europe), you have (for DSL) basically two options: You can
either pay a lower monthly fee and are limited to 1 GB of data transfer,
or you pay more and get an unlimited transfer.
Cable is cheaper and
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
if you you use html if you need to emphasize a
word, phrase, or paragraphic you can.
to do so now in plain text I have to use quote marks to do so
Well, using *asterisks* or _underlines_ (maybe /slashes/) is more
common, afaict.
--
They that can give up
Christian Biesinger wrote:
How is DSL Broadband setup overseas?
Here (Austria/Europe), you have (for DSL) basically two options: You can
either pay a lower monthly fee and are limited to 1 GB of data transfer,
or you pay more and get an unlimited transfer.
In Denmark, you normally pay
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Christian Biesinger wrote:
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
if you you use html if you need to emphasize a
word, phrase, or paragraphic you can.
to do so now in plain text I have to use quote marks to do so
Well, using *asterisks* or _underlines_ (maybe
michael lefevre wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Christian Biesinger wrote:
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
if you you use html if you need to emphasize a
word, phrase, or paragraphic you can.
to do so now in plain text I have to use quote marks to do so
Well, using *asterisks* or
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
Mozilla recognizes *bold* and /italic/, but not _underline_.
...and that seems to be bug 74248.
--
'Open Systems' means no fences. And no fences means no use for Gates.
- Sun Microsystems
In a world where more and more people want to receive their email on
PDAs, pagers, and cell phones, there is less and less place for the
bloat of HTML email.
If you're message can't be conveyed in simple plain-text that can be
displayed on whatever device I use to check my email, then make
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:02:34 +1100, Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can go offline before reading a message.
Exactly Why should I? Is Mozilla just for you and your HTML lovin
friends?
If I don't want my e-mail program hitting a web page without my
authorization, shouldn't I speak
Myself wrote:
Michael H. Warfield wrote:
Okkk... An there there are web bugs. The little goodies that
pull a special identifying image from their web site identifying your
E-Mail address as a good one and worth putting on their platinum we've
qualified this address as good list that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:02:34 +1100, Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can go offline before reading a message.
Exactly Why should I? Is Mozilla just for you and your HTML lovin
friends?
If I don't want my e-mail program hitting a web page without my
Morten Nilsen wrote:
Myself wrote:
Michael H. Warfield wrote:
Okkk... An there there are web bugs. The little goodies that
pull a special identifying image from their web site identifying your
E-Mail address as a good one and worth putting on their platinum we've
qualified this
Myself wrote:
And besides, more often than not, html mail contains ugly
fonts/colors and is spam.
Oh well then it must be true. What a terrific argument.
Is there anyone that can state the case?
If you're really interested you can do a search on google groups, this
argument has been
On Fri, 18 Jan 2002 04:04:23 +0100, fonz wrote:
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
This bug/rfe 30888
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30888
assigned to [EMAIL PROTECTED], a very busy man ;)
--
Gilles
Ian Davey wrote:
Myself wrote:
And besides, more often than not, html mail contains ugly
fonts/colors and is spam.
Oh well then it must be true. What a terrific argument.
Is there anyone that can state the case?
If you're really interested you can do a search on google groups,
Myself said:
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I want to know. It's clear
there are people religous about it so I'd like to understand why some
people think mail and newsgroups must only be plain text.
http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml
Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the
newgroup(s) netscape.public.mozilla.general:
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I want to know. It's clear
there are people religous about it so I'd like to understand why some
people think mail
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
Myself said:
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I want to know. It's
clear there are people religous about it so I'd like to understand why
some people think mail and newsgroups must only be plain text.
Andreas Sikkema wrote:
Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the
newgroup(s) netscape.public.mozilla.general:
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I want to know. It's clear
there are people religous about it so I'd like to understand
On 01/22/02 08:20 AM, Myself wrote:
snip
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I want to know. It's clear
there are people religous about it so I'd like to understand why some
people think mail and newsgroups must only be plain text.
[These views are mine and mine alone]
Spam
Myself wrote:
If you're really interested you can do a search on google groups,
this argument has been beaten to death many times. It basically comes
down to that fact that plain text is far more accessible to a large
variety of email and usenet clients. You can't even ensure a webpage
Pratik wrote:
On 01/22/02 08:20 AM, Myself wrote:
snip
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I want to know. It's
clear there are people religous about it so I'd like to understand why
some people think mail and newsgroups must only be plain text.
[These views are mine
Myself [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] in
the newgroup(s) netscape.public.mozilla.general:
So do webpages... I presume you use a browser? And webpages are made by
people that choose fonts and colors as well.
Hmm, it must be something to do with the
On 01/22/02 10:56 AM, Myself wrote:
Pratik wrote:
On 01/22/02 08:20 AM, Myself wrote:
snip
WTF is wrong with rich text mail? Seriously - I want to know. It's
clear there are people religous about it so I'd like to understand why
some people think mail and newsgroups must only be plain
Pratik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the newgroup(s)
netscape.public.mozilla.general:
The problem is that these 2 line messages are much more common that the
bulleted list.
I think the following list took just as long as a richt text version
- Two
Ian Davey wrote:
Myself wrote:
If you're really interested you can do a search on google groups,
this argument has been beaten to death many times. It basically comes
down to that fact that plain text is far more accessible to a large
variety of email and usenet clients. You can't
Pratik wrote:
On 01/22/02 10:56 AM, Myself wrote:
Pratik wrote:
On 01/22/02 08:20 AM, Myself wrote:
snip
snip
I don't see the diff from loading a webpage. But anyway, mail prefs
like Ximian Evolution has it seems would address this (see other
message in this thread).
Myself wrote:
snip
Why oh why do you insist on twisting everything around?
mailnews is NOT related to newspapers, books, web, foo, bar or baz.
Just because my local paper uses a red font on green background, news
shouldn't do the same.
news (usenet) is a completely different medium from a
Morten Nilsen wrote:
Myself wrote:
snip
Why oh why do you insist on twisting everything around?
mailnews is NOT related to newspapers, books, web, foo, bar or baz.
Just because my local paper uses a red font on green background, news
shouldn't do the same.
news (usenet) is a
And it came to pass that Myself wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:02:34 +1100, Myself
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can go offline before reading a message.
Exactly Why should I? Is Mozilla just for you and your
HTML lovin friends?
If I don't want
And it came to pass that Myself wrote:
Ian Davey wrote:
Myself wrote:
And besides, more often than not, html mail contains ugly
fonts/colors and is spam.
Oh well then it must be true. What a terrific argument.
Is there anyone that can state the case?
If you're really
On 1/22/2002 7:46 PM Christopher Jahn spoke thusly:
And on top of that, it is a potential security hazard.
And many news servers still refuse to accept html news. Most news
servers run on rather old machines, and space is rare, and html
postings... they not only clogg the system, they make the
On Sat, 19 Jan 2002 16:29:58 -0500, WDA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christopher Rued wrote:
On 2002.01.19 12:58 Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
I don't think there's a way to do that in Mozilla,
Which brings up the
David Simpson wrote:
I'm obviously not one of your clients then. The only HTML mail I
receive is SPAM and I don't want that at all. Plain text for me every
day.
I almost scream out in disgust when I recieve html mail,
or read a html post to usenet.
--
Morten Nilsen, aka Dr. P
We are the
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 03:12:18 +1030, David Simpson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm obviously not one of your clients then. The only HTML mail I
receive is SPAM and I don't want that at all. Plain text for me every
day.
Thank you YES
I also think that the HTML opens you up to certain
Christopher Rued wrote:
On 2002.01.19 12:58 Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
I don't think there's a way to do that in Mozilla,
Which brings up the question: Why not?
Simple: Because mobody happened to implement it yet.
Preferences-Advanced, uncheck Enable Javascript for Mail and
Newsgroups. Unless I am missing something, I have never heard of a
vulnerability that can be exploited without javascript...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 03:12:18 +1030, David Simpson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 05:00:56PM -0500, Travis Crump wrote:
Preferences-Advanced, uncheck Enable Javascript for Mail and
Newsgroups. Unless I am missing something, I have never heard of a
vulnerability that can be exploited without javascript...
What about those annoying spam
Daniel R. Tobias [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] for curmudgeons like me who still think that
plain text email with lines of no more than 70 characters and hard
line breaks between them, and replies written after a carefully
trimmed quote preceded with angle brackets and followed by a
Michael H. Warfield wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 05:00:56PM -0500, Travis Crump wrote:
Preferences-Advanced, uncheck Enable Javascript for Mail and
Newsgroups. Unless I am missing something, I have never heard of a
vulnerability that can be exploited without javascript...
What
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
I just had three letters that were redirects to web pages. Is there a
way to force text view of mail?
redirects should be disabled. make sure to disable Javascript in
Mailnews as well.
Otherwise, see bug 30888.
On 2002.01.19 12:58 Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
I don't think there's a way to do that in Mozilla,
Which brings up the question: Why not?
Many people prefer not to have to look at HTMLized e-mail.
--
Chris
Christopher Rued wrote:
On 2002.01.19 12:58 Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
I don't think there's a way to do that in Mozilla,
Which brings up the question: Why not?
Many people prefer not to have to look at HTMLized
WDA wrote:
Well, I don't happen to be one of them. Frankly, 100% of all my
colleagues prefer html as opposed to plain text mail.
Why is that? My observation is that about 99.9% of the HTML email I
receive gains absolutely nothing from this other than to waste
bandwidth and disk space.
WDA wrote:
Christopher Rued wrote:
On 2002.01.19 12:58 Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
I don't think there's a way to do that in Mozilla,
Which brings up the question: Why not?
Many people prefer not to
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. said:
I'm another that prefers the html(ized) email. I find it easier to
follow there is something about using monospaced fonts (courier, Geneva
and so on), line breaks, and so on that puts me to sleep and make it
difficult for the old brain to follow. I find I can
On 2002.01.19 16:29 WDA wrote:
Christopher Rued wrote:
On 2002.01.19 12:58 Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
I don't think there's a way to do that in Mozilla,
Which brings up the question: Why not?
Many people
Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?
I just had three letters that were redirects to web pages. Is there a
way to force text view of mail?
64 matches
Mail list logo
