Well, you could do it like Thunderbird does it. The signature is an external html file... You then don't need to support rich text editing of the message / signature. Its up to the user to include it.
We use an image with embedded data as base64 in our email signatures and it looks great. Huge disappointment k9 does not support this... its 2016 not 2002. Kevin On Wednesday, 14 September 2016 04:39:05 UTC-4, Philip Whitehouse wrote: > > > > On September 14, 2016 8:49:15 AM GMT+01:00, "Gary C. Wood" < > [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > >Thanks for this, Philip. > > > >I do appreciate that allowing rich text of HTML composition would be a > >significant amount of work (though, I'd argue, a necessary thing to do, > >given that the competition now has this functionality). > > The competition is sort of irrelevant. Development is purely on a > voluntary basis and priorities set by individuals. Bluntly it will be done > when one or more developers dedicate the time to it. > > > > >However, a simpler solution would simply be to allow the use if HTML > >tags in the signature field. It would then be easy to insert images and > >provide more formatting, for those of us that need this functionality. > > You can't just add HTML tags in the signature and ignore the rest of the > message. Either all your paragraphs and new lines would collapse into one > blob of text or the tags would just be displayed as text. > > > Best regards, > > Philip Whitehouse > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "K-9 Mail" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
