David Boggon, [DB] wrote: DB> My point was that one should look at the facts,
Many seem to resist the facts of the matter. :/ We speak about bandwidth, problems with accurate reproducability at the recipients end, the fact that the recipient is forced to read using fonts and font sizing that they may not like or literally find difficult to read. At least in Opera, I can quickly zoom in on text I find difficult to read, or just use the CSS support to change the text styles. Not so with HTML mail. You're just stuck! I don't know how much more facts are needed. People say HTML is here to stay, and I say, so is crime. Does that make crime a good thing or something we should all embrace?? DB> and discern the best course of action to take based on those facts, DB> rather than evoking arguments to rationalise one's prejudicial DB> viewpoint. It's not a prejudice. We have practical concerns and unfortunately, it would seem that the scope and validity of these concerns aren't *really* appreciated unless one is really experiencing them. DB> As my last contribution to this thread, I just want to say I have DB> found the discussion informative, but that I do not wish to be DB> identified (demonised) as someone who advocates HTML... I wouldn't go as far as to demonize anyone who advocates using HTML mail. I do see a place for it but only in the case of a few exceptions and where the HTML mail composer fully understands the issues and uses an appropriate client. Some HTML formatted newsletters I receive are nicely done. However, private HTML mail is usually more a problem than a solution. I'm subscribed to a busy mailing list where about 40% of the e-mail is HTML formatted. I just wish I could have you sit beside me and take a look at the mail on my monitor and with my resolution. It's tedious to the point of completely unreasonable to read the HTML versions. Thank goodness that TB! is capable of always presenting me with a plain text version. DB> I sense a lot of strong feeling on the list about this. Yeah. Because we've had to deal with the problems with it. It's not just about colour. We do like colours and nice fonts. DB> I do advocate informed choice. Indeed. It's my strong opinion, but an opinion anyway, that the decision to use HTML formatted mail by default, isn't an informed one. The fact that so many people are using it doesn't make it a good format. The fact that so many people use Win9x doesn't make it the better OS to use. DB> Since coming to TB! I have been somewhat converted to plain text DB> myself, and like many who have contributed, find it more than DB> adequate for most of my mail. It still seems obvious to me that DB> Ritlabs is making a judgement about HTML in the way it has DB> configured TB!, and if this is a considered stance based on the DB> principal of the thing, I applaud it wholeheartedly. Here, here!!! -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________ Current version is 2.00 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
