Chuq Von Rospach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This is another case where the fight is over, and we might as well get > used to it. Whether its good or bad, it's here and endemic.
Yes, and it's used almost entirely for spam, which makes it very convenient. 60-80% of the spam that I get is in HTML. 0.01% of the legitimate mail that I get is in HTML, approximately. I therefore apply simple mathematics and make the obvious choice when doing mail filtering, and I've yet to regret it. I find the success of HTML extremely convenient; all of the sleeze have adopted it wholesale, thus enabling me to easily ignore everything they have to say. (This is for messages with a content-type of text/html. Usage of multipart/alternative is much more ambiguous, but in those cases I just ignore the text/html portion, since it's almost without exception formatted *less* readibly than the text version regardless of what HTML browser I use to view it.) HTML is being widely used in e-mail, but by and large it's a joke. Occasionally an amusing and useful one, though. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
