Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
Terrence Wood wrote Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:02:32 +1300: On 22 Feb 2006, at 2:50 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: Outlook users should ...switch to a better mail client that isn't broken. Outllok can be configured to send plain text can't it? I think an equally big problem with Outhouse is that it can't quote properly without an add-in and that even if someone knows how and takes the trouble to fix their copy of it that it still breaks threading by stripping all incoming references before it sends out replies. It really irritates me that new SeaMonkey/Mozilla/Thunderbird profiles also send HTML by default, and that to really turn it off you have to find two pref boxes on separate settings pages to uncheck. I usually don't bother to read the 1mm tall text it sends out (screenshots on request), unless I'm really interested in the thread. All incoming HTML and other multipart gets filtered automatically to my trash, and so I only open what looks safe according to subject lines. Good thing for the subject key [WSG] or many posts from this list would never get opened, unlike WD and css-d posts, whose moms seem to have greater disgust for HTML than Russ co and pre-filter so that those lists don't get evil mail in the first place. Maybe we should take a poll to see if the majority want that implemented here. ;-) Speaking of screenshots, this reminds me of a file I just rediscovered earlier while reviewing some oldies from back before I knew what a doctype was. Try not to have a heart attack ROFLOL. Yes, I really did regularly use 800x600 once upon a time. http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/emailmumbojumbo.html :-p -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/auth ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
Terrence Wood wrote: On 22 Feb 2006, at 2:50 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: Outlook users should ...switch to a better mail client that isn't broken. Outllok can be configured to send plain text can't it? It can, but there are a variety of serious problems with Outlook that make it an extremely bad program to use. I won't go into much detail, because it's off topic, these are just a few issues. * Lack of support for format=flowed [RFC 2646] * Failure to quote properly by default, even in plain text mode. (Incorrect use of vertical bar '|', instead of '' - not sure if that's by default, but it does do it.) * Lack of support for sending the proper sig separator: -- (the space on the end would be stripped before sending, even if you typed it manually) * Failure to remove the signature when replying to e-mails that do use the proper sig separator. * Country specific prefixes to subject for replying and forwarding. * Incorrectly formatted (bloated) attribution line. * Signature is placed above the quote in replies by default (i.e. top-posting). And that's just for plain text. It gets worse when you look at its HTML mail. Some of these things are fixed by using Quote Fix; but IMHO, you're just beating a dead horse. It doesn't fix the major security holes in it, its inferior junk mail filter, its bloated user interface, and probably many more issues I can't recall off the top of my head. Now, this is getting way off-topic so if anyone wants to continue the discussion with me, I'll be more than happy to respond off-list. I usually don't bother to read the 1mm tall text it sends out (screenshots on request), unless I'm really interested in the thread. Can you put the screenshots up somewhere and link to them? I've never seen such small text, either in or from Outlook. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
On 22/02/06, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All incoming HTML and other multipart gets filtered automatically to my trash, and so I only open what looks safe according to subject lines. Good thing for the subject key [WSG] or many posts from this list would never get opened, unlike WD and css-d posts, whose moms seem to have greater disgust for HTML than Russ co and pre-filter so that those lists don't get evil mail in the first place. Maybe we should take a poll to see if the majority want that implemented here. ;-) If a poll is being begun, I'll vote 'yes' to filter out e-mail that isn't plain text. -- T. R. Valentine Use a decent browser: Safari, Firefox, Mozilla, Opera (Avoid IE like the plague it is)
Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
At 09:46 AM 2/22/2006, Nick Gleitzman wrote: ... could list members please use plain text for posting? ... kinder to those who only have dialup connections ... And those of us on slow supposedly broadband wireless links. ... makes the posts more legible. I, for one, tend to skip over posts which are rendered in my mail client in teeny tiny text... I have told my mail client to render the HTML as plain text with no images. This works fine most of the time. Any message I can't read this way is probably not worth reading anyway, particularly on a list about web design. Tom Worthington FACS HLM [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph: 0419 496150 Director, Tomw Communications Pty LtdABN: 17 088 714 309 PO Box 13, Belconnen ACT 2617http://www.tomw.net.au/ Director, ACS Communications Tech Board http://www.acs.org.au/ctb/ Visiting Fellow, ANU Blog: http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/atom.xml ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
You mean none of you can see my animated gifs? ;) To set default messages to plain text in Outlook: Tools Options Mail Format - Compose message in: Plain text (drop down box) To set html messages as plain text when replying: Format Plain Text (or Alt+o t for all us keyboard junkies) Paul 'I miss Mozilla mail' Bennett -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Worthington Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 12:23 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list At 09:46 AM 2/22/2006, Nick Gleitzman wrote: ... could list members please use plain text for posting? ... kinder to those who only have dialup connections ... And those of us on slow supposedly broadband wireless links. ... makes the posts more legible. I, for one, tend to skip over posts which are rendered in my mail client in teeny tiny text... I have told my mail client to render the HTML as plain text with no images. This works fine most of the time. Any message I can't read this way is probably not worth reading anyway, particularly on a list about web design. Tom Worthington FACS HLM [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph: 0419 496150 Director, Tomw Communications Pty LtdABN: 17 088 714 309 PO Box 13, Belconnen ACT 2617http://www.tomw.net.au/ Director, ACS Communications Tech Board http://www.acs.org.au/ctb/ Visiting Fellow, ANU Blog: http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/atom.xml ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
THREAD CLOSED Please do not reply to this thread - it has already been closed Russ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
Nick Gleitzman wrote: A frequent request, which occasionally needs to be remade: could list members please use plain text for posting? Yes, absolutely! The following articles discuss the various issues further. Although they generally relate to USENET, most of the advice applies equally to mailing lists like this as well. http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/dont.html This is some of the reasons why HTML mail is not appreciated: http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml And also, people need to learn how to quote properly: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html http://www.xs4all.nl/%7ewijnands/nnq/nquote.html Note: Outlook users should get Quote Fix or switch to a better mail client that isn't broken. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
On 22 Feb 2006, at 2:50 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: Outlook users should ...switch to a better mail client that isn't broken. Outllok can be configured to send plain text can't it? I usually don't bother to read the 1mm tall text it sends out (screenshots on request), unless I'm really interested in the thread. kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
On 2/22/06, Terrence Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 22 Feb 2006, at 2:50 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: Outlook users should ...switch to a better mail client that isn't broken. Outllok can be configured to send plain text can't it? I think Lachlan meant that + bottom-quoting? ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Plain text v HTML on this list
On 2/21/06 11:10 PM Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out: On 22 Feb 2006, at 2:50 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: Outlook users should ...switch to a better mail client that isn't broken. Outllok can be configured to send plain text can't it? I think Lachlan meant that + bottom-quoting? I don't know what Lachlan meant entirely, but I 100% require plain text and top-quoting. I usually immediately delete the alternatives without reading. Too much email; too little time. Rick Faaberg ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
