"Andrew Savory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > Boom. I'm Mr Average User, I've no clue what this "plain text/html" > distinction is all about, > [...] The "average" user (and even the "average" developer, > I'll warrant) has chosen rich text emails over text emails, [...] > You can bet your ass that's because the Facebook implementors did not > have time to add rich text features. It's well-known that spent all > their time dealing with scalability, which suggests bells and whistles > like usefulness and html mails will come later. [...] > That assumes that it's a zero-sum game. AFAICT, being more inclusive > is a net gain [...]
Apart from the Facebook claim, I think the above are all repeats. Not saying one way or the other on their merit, but please can someone post evidence to support any of them if you know it. Thanks in advance, -- MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 - Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ - Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ _______________________________________________ Fsfe-uk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
