Brian Westerman wrote: >That's how I currently send it. Both parts currently contain exactly the same >data (although the HTML one looks nicer), and if the recipient doesn't support >HTML, they only see the TEXT part.
>It's probably the best solution for the normal data that gets sent, I think I >iwll use Tim's suggestion for the additional detail data, (I still have to >test it though to see). It's kind of difficult to know when I reach the limit >of what fits into a link, but I'll get it worked out. To what or whom are you refering? Please be kind to give background. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
