[OT] Text vs HTML
Yet another apology, I found why I was posting in HTML, even though I intended to explicitly send in text to gnhlug.org. I am truly sorry for that, as I am aware both of the technical and the personal reasons not to do so as some members have a strong objection to HTML email. I use Thunderbird. It works well for me and does IMAP fairly well as well as being cross-platform, so I can use it from Linux, OS X and Windows, all of which I must use constantly. I explicitly configured sending to the group to be a text-only domain. Somehow I had an entry in one of my address books which indicated gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org preferred HTML. As I also had a separate entry in the same address book saying it preferred text, I am not sure how that happened. Even if Thunderbird is told the domain prefers text, it will override that if the address book says otherwise. As to which entry wins when there are duplicates in the address book, I guess the most embarrassing one must, by Murphy's Law. In any event, I have corrected the issue here, and will check the other computers I work from elsewhere to ensure this does not recur. (I shall now slink away in embarrassment.) ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: [OT] Text vs HTML
2009/3/17 Greg Rundlett (freephile) g...@freephile.com: Aren't GNHLUG lists configured that way? list_admin They're mainly configured with the stock defaults (except when they're not, heh). If consensus of the list membership is that HTML stripping should be turned on, it's easy enough to do so. Note that a few people complaining loudly is not consensus. :) I'm not exactly sure how we'd gauge consensus of the list. I don't think we can ask for a majority when we don't even know how many people we really have reading. FWIW, there are currently 273 apparently-working addresses subscribed to gnhlug-discuss. Addresses != people. /list_admin As an aside, I'd be in favor of Google changing the descriptions to non-standard and standard text personal_opinion (Somewhat playing devil's advocate here.) MIME multipart/alternative is well-defined; HTML is well-defined. I'm not sure why using those specifications as they were intended yields non-standard. The Internet is built on rough consensus and working code, and it seems HTML mail has achieved that more than many other things we're pleased to call standard. (Ever try to get two different IPsec implementations to interoperate? *shudder*) Don't get me wrong, I think HTML mail is overrated, usually annoying, often abused, and occasionally outright dangerous. But I'm also a big believer in it takes all kinds. I generally avoid posting HTML mail on this list because I know there are some who actively dislike it, it's mostly not needed, and workarounds do exist. But on occasion I've found it would have been convenient to just hyperlink something, rather than resorting to cumbersome manual footnotes and URLs in plaintext. /personal_opinion -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
