Re: [css-d] [OT] Why no HTML
FWIW, I think that Ghodmode has every right to ask why HTML e-mails are prohibited on this list, even though I personally rejoice that they are. I also appreciate the non-confrontational way in which he has presented his views and responded to the view of others. However. In my e-mail client (Seamonkey), there would appear to be an option to mark potential recipients as able (or not able) to receive HTML e-mails; if I (inadvertently) send attempt to send an HTML e-mail to someone not marked as able to receive HTML e-mails, my client asks what I want to do : send as ASCII, send as HTML or send as both. I suspect it also asks if I want to remember that decision. Ghodmode, does your e-mail client not offer similar possibilities, and if so, can you simply not mark this list as Cannot accept HTML e-mails and Send as ASCII while leaving all other e-mail recipients unchanged ? Even more off-topic : how is one meant to mentally render Ghodmode ? Is it Godmode, or G Hodmode or G H Odmode or what ? Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] [OT] Why no HTML
On Wednesday, July 20, 2011, 12:59:45 AM, Ghodmode wrote: There aren't any contemporary email applications that can't handle HTML. Is anyone using one? --- Er.. I am. At least, I'm using an email client that doesn't by default render HTML (it also doesn't retrieve external resources such as linked images and stylesheets). Instead it displays the text alternative and provides the HTML as an attachment that I can open in a browser should I wish to (which I won't except from trusted sources - and that doesn't include mailing lists). If you send HTML only without the plain text alternative then all I see is a blank page. Since almost all HTML messages contain both the HTML and also a plain text alternative, every character of HTML is bloat and so most HTML messages are more than twice the size they need to be. FWIW, I connect via GPRS (which is what my mobile broadband service falls back to when 3G isn't available) when 'out of office' and even when I have ~1Mb/s MBB available I pay for it at the rate of almost $25US per GB. So while I probably wouldn't leave the list if it allowed HTML, I hope you can understand why I wouldn't exactly rejoice! -- Geoff __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] [OT] Why no HTML
On Wednesday, July 20, 2011 12:12:26 pm Ghodmode wrote: Ya I shouldn't have said there aren't any, but I was hoping someone would comment with the name of one that doesn't. No one has yet... Not even you. What's TA-ships? Teaching assistantships. Any grad student teaching a class, which is many. Are any of them on this list? I don't know. But there are students in Graphic design and computer science and Information Science, and it's reasonable to guess that many of those would be interested in web technologies, and perhaps be a part of this list. And they're using one of the well-known webmails... Hordemail I think. What do you use? KMail. It also supports HTML mail too, of course. We have smart people in this community. If people are using a problematic email client, they'll know it. Besides that, most emails are HTML formatted. If they have problems with HTML in a mailing list, they'll also have problems elsewhere. Yup. And do. I have to use Outlook at work, as an office policy. And replying to HTML emails with inline comments is really awful. There's really no way to do it that doesn't make your replies look like part of the original quoted email. This entire conversation would blow up and be almost entirely illegible the way it's currently written if this was in HTML. You're right, but I still say it would be nice to be able to do things like this. However, I'm learning that I'm alone in that opinion. Not really. I don't really disagree with your basic premise: that disallowing HTML email is largely outdated. I was participating in your discussion - answering your questions with possible reasons from my own experience. All of my reasons were fringe cases, which sort of proves your argument. The problem is that I don't disagree with the rest of the list's premise that HTML email isn't really necessary either. You're asking why we don't. Everyone else is asking why we should. And as far as I can see, the reasons aren't that compelling in either direction. ---Tim __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] [OT] Why no HTML
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Mark Henderson shadefro...@gmail.com wrote: On 20 July 2011 11:59, Ghodmode ghodm...@ghodmode.com wrote: Okay, so I change my email settings every time I send to CSS-discuss so that it's plain-text, but I have to ask... why? In case you haven't already noticed, you are going to get *flamed* for asking that :-) Much as in the same way if you had asked why bottom posting is preferred (and enforced to a large degree I might add). That wasn't my intention. I sincerely feel that HTML makes email better. I didn't expect to be the only one, but that's why I asked the question. It's okay, though... I can take the flames :) Is that a good comparison? There's a clearly defined reason for bottom-posting since top-posting breaks the order of the conversation. There are clearly defined reasons for banning HTML email, such as irresponsible senders, bandwidth efficiency, and privacy/security concerns, but most of them don't really seem to be as much of a problem within this community. Top-posting is also strongly discouraged, if not forbidden, on most mailing lists, but HTML isn't. I'll go with that comparison, though. You are right about the flames (obviously), but here's how that conversation could ideally go: Question: blockquote Why the heck do I need to post in the middle of the quoted text when I reply to someone's question. It's quicker and easier at the top. /blockquote Answer: blockquote When you reply below the question, it's easier to read the resulting emails from top to bottom and understand the conversation. If the answer is at the top and the question is somewhere in the middle, it's difficult to read and understand. /blockquote Final message: blockquote Okay... Cool! That makes sense. Thank you for answering my question. /blockquote However, as you mentioned, questions like this never get this type of answer. Maybe people need to vent their frustrations and questions like this give them that opportunity? There aren't any contemporary email applications that can't handle HTML. Is anyone using one? It's not just about clients, but servers also that are sometimes configured to reject html when certain criteria are met. On the flip-side of this there aren't many mail clients that can't handle the configuration of both -- plain text for certain addresses/mailing lists and rich text/HTML for the rest, if that's your choice (I have a similar setup where some addresses get html and the rest get plain text). There is no need to change your settings every time you send to this or any other list -- so what client are you using? I'm sure we can sort it out. I hadn't thought about the potential server problems. Still, most email is HTML. So, any problem with allowing HTML on this list would also mean a lot of problems with a lot of other emails. You're right about the clients. I'm using Gmail and it doesn't have a text-only setting on a per-recipient basis... At least I don't think it does... I may need to look more closely. My ghodmode.com email is hosted by Google Apps. My laziness wasn't the real reason for the question, though. -- //Mark Thank you. -- Ghodmode http://www.ghodmode.com/blog __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] [OT] Why no HTML
On 20/07/2011 2:29 PM, Ghodmode wrote: I'm not going anywhere, but you have a point. Some people seem to be disproportionately upset by the topic. The reason that text is used is mainly due to security issues and encoding (mono-space). My email client is permanently set to only show text and send text emails. Another reason is that this list conforms to what is practiced by what I believe are all W3C working Groups. This is text format from the CSS WG open mailing list. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jul/0306.html You recently made a comment about the practice for this list to have the To: field not being sent to the list. Any thread where you becomes involved shows a broken thread in this list archives (below) and most email clients. http://archivist.incutio.com/viewlist/css-discuss/116402 There are good reason why things work the way they do. Wondering about where _list-mum_ is since this thread is clearly *off topic*. -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/ __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] ADMIN: [OT] Why no HTML
At 12:25 +0900 7/20/11, Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: I'm surprised the listmom hasn't called a halt to this discussion yet. Even the listmom has to sleep sometime. Generally, the nights when he goes to bed early and wakes up late [which, with three children including an infant, are insanely rare events] are the nights when offtopic eruptions occur. It's downright uncanny. Hopefully he will do so soon. End of thread: it's self-admittedly off-topic. Questions about the list settings should be sent to the administrator (css-d-ow...@lists.css-discuss.org), not the list itself. I realize this doesn't lead to public discussions of the list settings, but on the other hand it also doesn't fill up the inboxes of ~8,500 subscribers all over the world, most of whom seem to be fine with the list settings. If I start hearing from lots of people that they would like to discuss the list's settings or community or other aspects of the list itself, I can look into setting up a css-d-meta list. We haven't needed such a thing in nine-plus years, but there's always a first time. To reiterate, however: this particular thread is now closed. Thanks. -- Eric A. Meyer (http://meyerweb.com/eric/), List Chaperone CSS is much too interesting and elegant to be not taken seriously. -- Martina Kosloff (http://mako4css.com/) __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] [OT] Why no HTML
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Alan Gresley a...@css-class.com wrote: On 20/07/2011 2:29 PM, Ghodmode wrote: I'm not going anywhere, but you have a point. Some people seem to be disproportionately upset by the topic. The reason that text is used is mainly due to security issues and encoding (mono-space). My email client is permanently set to only show text and send text emails. Another reason is that this list conforms to what is practiced by what I believe are all W3C working Groups. This is text format from the CSS WG open mailing list. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jul/0306.html I can't dispute the potential for security or privacy problems for HTML email in general, but I do think that most people who receive email are subjected to those problems and that this group isn't the most likely source of them. W3C mailing lists allow HTML and attachments: from http://www.w3.org/2002/03/email_attachment_formats.html : blockquote Although email messages themselves are normally sent in plain text or HTML format, attachments in other formats are sometimes included. /blockquote You recently made a comment about the practice for this list to have the To: field not being sent to the list. Any thread where you becomes involved shows a broken thread in this list archives (below) and most email clients. I didn't understand part of that. Any thread where I become involved shows a broken thread in the list archives? How is that? I have made comments about the Reply-To, but that's not related to this topic, is it? http://archivist.incutio.com/viewlist/css-discuss/116402 That links to a continuous thread hierarchy. There are good reason why things work the way they do. Are the reasons still good? That's the question I was asking... What are they and are they valid? Wondering about where _list-mum_ is since this thread is clearly *off topic*. Yes, it relates to CSS-Discuss rather than to CSS. However, since it affects everyone on the list, it's only appropriate to have the conversation on the mailing list. list-mum? Do you mean the list administrator? Note that the email that started the thread was sent to css-d-owner and only CCd to css-d. He hasn't replied. It became a conversation thread because people wanted to discuss it. I'm just replying to peoples messages that they sent to me on the list. I didn't reply on the list unless the messages were sent to me on the list... this one is included, of course. -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/ -- Ghodmode http://www.ghodmode.com/blog __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
[css-d] question on space at bottom of page
In this page: http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/paramaya/wgs/dish-network-services/ There's a large image background to footer-container (not yet completed). There's a small space of about 9px tall below the bottom of footer-container at the very bottom of the browser window, I'm not sure where that's coming from. Can someone help? -- Debbie Campbell www.redkitecreative.com __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] question on space at bottom of page
On 7/20/11 12:46 PM, Debbie Campbell wrote:
In this page:
http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/paramaya/wgs/dish-network-services/
There's a large image background to footer-container (not yet
completed). There's a small space of about 9px tall below the bottom
of footer-container at the very bottom of the browser window, I'm not
sure where that's coming from. Can someone help?
OS/browser?
Not sure what you mean...
.copyright {
padding-bottom: 20px; /* - :: is this the culprit? ::--*/
}
~d
--
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] question on space at bottom of page
In this page:
http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/paramaya/wgs/dish-network-services/
There's a large image background to footer-container (not yet completed).
There's a small space of about 9px tall below the bottom of
footer-container at the very bottom of the browser window, I'm not sure
where that's coming from. Can someone help?
It seems a collapsing margin issue.
Try
.copyright { margin: 0; ... }
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 3335 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
The Professional version does not have this message
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] question on space at bottom of page
On 7/20/11 10:39 AM, David Laakso wrote:
On 7/20/11 12:46 PM, Debbie Campbell wrote:
In this page:
http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/paramaya/wgs/dish-network-services/
There's a large image background to footer-container (not yet
completed). There's a small space of about 9px tall below the
bottom of footer-container at the very bottom of the browser
window, I'm not sure where that's coming from. Can someone help?
OS/browser? Not sure what you mean... .copyright { padding-bottom:
20px; /* - :: is this the culprit? ::--*/ }
~d
I think David L is close - that p.copyright is positioned relatively
with a top of 10px. Result - it overflows the body element, causing
your gap.
--
Cordially,
David
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] question on space at bottom of page
I changed it, it didn't make a difference...
--
Debbie
On 7/20/2011 1:35 PM, Maujor (via-gmail) wrote:
In this page:
http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/paramaya/wgs/dish-network-services/
There's a large image background to footer-container (not yet
completed). There's a small space of about 9px tall below the bottom
of footer-container at the very bottom of the browser window, I'm not
sure where that's coming from. Can someone help?
It seems a collapsing margin issue.
Try
.copyright { margin: 0; ... }
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 3335 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
The Professional version does not have this message
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] question on space at bottom of page
On 7/20/11 6:04 PM, Debbie Campbell wrote:
I changed it, it didn't make a difference...
--
Debbie
http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/paramaya/wgs/dish-network-services/
.copyright {
padding: 0 0 20px;/*- :: delete and/or tweak::---*/
}
Btw, top-posting screws up the archives [among other things].
--
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
