> Randomthots wrote:

> > Now consider that ODF is a much richer format than HTML. And being 
> > similar to HTML, there is no technical reason (that I see, anyway) that 
> > the format couldn't be adapted to eventually replace HTML. 

HTML is already TOO complex for mail. That's why it's rejected by so
many people. Didn't you read what I wrote last day ? Rich mail
acceptance requires a simplified SUBSET of HTML/XHTML, not a SUPERSET
like ODF.

I shudder a the number of cycles needed to filter a mailing list if its
default format changes to ODF.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

Reply via email to