GENTLEMEN!
I Know I am not a regular contributor, but since no one else has
said it...
I will:
While the language being used is quite controlled and proper (so
Far! :),
I feel obliged to point out that this is no longer a civil discussion,
but is (IMHO)
on the verge of becoming a "holy war" or even degenerating into a simple
Feud.
Could we all back off, please, and take a deep breath? Thanks!
Now let me offer my own opinion, which is offered in the spirit of
moving things
forward:
Dave Voorhis made the comment below "...Whether it should or
should not be
continued is something for the list moderator to determine." There is a
core of truth
here which, IMHO, answers the issue between Dave and Ed: HTML will
happen - some places.
*Should* it happen in a particular place (i.e.: on a specific mailing
list) is up to the list
administrator, probably working in conjunction with the members of that
list.
Now, having said that - the next question (IMHO) is HOW should
html, attachments, etc. be
handled in lists? What options for restrictions should an administrator
have i.e.: only allow
(or disallow?) specified mime types? Size limits on attachments? Filter
based on HTML content
to block JAVA, TCL or other programing language content?
At this point the mechanics of *how* to do it are less important
than *what* we need (or want)
to do. (or to quote from Weird Science... " I know all about reality...
don't !$#%$ with the fantasy" :).
Douglas Fajardo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dave Voorhis wrote:
>
> At 09:40 AM 4/7/98 -0400, Woodrick, Ed wrote:
>
> >And for those of you who are so worried about bandwidth, why did you
> >include me on the recipients list? [...]
> >And sure, I know that replying to the list and the
> >sender is considered proper etiquette on some lists, but just because it
> >is considered proper, doesn't mean that it should be continued.
>
> Perhaps, but it IS considered proper etiquette on this list. Whether it
> should or should not be continued is something for the list moderator to
> determine.
>
<<<<SNIP>>>
