Hi
On Wednesday 18 June 2014 at 6:31:38 AM, in
, Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
> Well, if in fact all those things will affect the way
> the text is displayed, then I guess I really don't know
> how the text appears to them. I never checked, just
> assumed.
Any of those things could potentially affe
Hello MFPA,
Monday, June 16, 2014, 12:42:51 AM, among other things, you wrote:
M> I have that ability in plaintext, via the
M> fairly-universally-understood convention of:-
M> *bold*
M> /italics/
M> _underlined_
Further to my earlier message I now realise that you are just showing the
usual
Hello MFPA,
Monday, June 16, 2014, 12:42:51 AM, among other things, you wrote:
M> I have that ability in plaintext, via the
M> fairly-universally-understood convention of:-
M> *bold*
M> /italics/
M> _underlined_
How do you do this with TB? I have not found any way so far.
--
Best regards,
R
Hello MFPA,
On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 you wrote:
M> Hi
M> On Monday 16 June 2014 at 12:14:42 AM, in
M> , Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
>> I used this Gmail account to BCC myself
>> on several HTML messages so that I could see what my
>> recipients were seeing.
M> I take it you *know* they view the
Hi
On Monday 16 June 2014 at 12:14:42 AM, in
, Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
> I used this Gmail account to BCC myself
> on several HTML messages so that I could see what my
> recipients were seeing.
I take it you *know* they view their mail exclusively on the google
website, without any "themes" bein
Hi
On Monday 16 June 2014 at 3:44:06 PM, in
, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
>> You don't get this problem with plain text. Every
>> plain text message is always legible.
> No, it isn't. Even MFPA admits that tables are not
> legible in plaintext.
I actually said that when the sender has placed a
Hi
On Monday 16 June 2014 at 2:17:52 PM, in
, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
> In business, they actually are not.
I guess that depends on the people you contact in the course of that
business.
> That's why I asked
> MFPA in my other message just now what business he is
> in: I can imagine that
Hi
On Monday 16 June 2014 at 2:13:56 PM, in
, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
> That either depends of the line of work you are in, or
> the century you live in.
And on what you are comfortable with aesthetically, and your preferred
method of working.
> No, please do not send me attachments unless
6/17/2014 10:02 AM
Hi Fred,
On 6/17/2014 Fred wrote:
>> Your contribution to this topic was zero. But thanks for the effort.
F> I disagree with your measure of contribution and am disappointed by your
F> sarcasm. The discussion has been (well, at least to me) quite interesting,
F> with good in
> Your contribution to this topic was zero. But thanks for the effort.
I disagree with your measure of contribution and am disappointed by your
sarcasm. The discussion has been (well, at least to me) quite interesting,
with good input from both sides of the HTML email issue (including most of
the
Monday, June 16, 2014, 4:44:06 PM, you wrote:
> Wasted bandwidth: Not an issue in the 21st century.
Of course it's a waste. Why send the same message twice? Even without
roaming charges, many providers have daily volume limits. Plain text is
more than adequate. I agree attachments don't belon
Hello Adrian,
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 16:30:12 +0200 GMT (16-Jun-14, 21:30 +0700 GMT),
Adrian Godfrey wrote:
>> And even if the recipient views in HTML, their viewing settings may be
>> wildly different to your own, so they don't see what you imagine they
>> might.
> Not to mention all those craz
Monday, June 16, 2014, 1:14:42 AM, you wrote:
> I too have a Gmail account
> which I seldom use because TB! far exceeds Gmail.
I have a gmail account as well. The only time I went to the website
was to create that address in the first place (or to resolve those
pesky "web login required"
Monday, June 16, 2014, 12:42:51 AM, you wrote:
> And even if the recipient views in HTML, their viewing settings may be
> wildly different to your own, so they don't see what you imagine they
> might.
Not to mention all those crazy colours that make a lot of HTML mails
extremely difficult t
Hello Jack,
On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 18:14:42 -0500 GMT (16-Jun-14, 06:14 +0700 GMT),
Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
> All excellent points. I must confess to not knowing that your
> descriptions of *bold*, /italics/ and _underline_ were commonly
> accepted methods of expressing those features in plaintext.
Hello MFPA,
On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:50:57 +0100 GMT (15-Jun-14, 17:50 +0700 GMT),
MFPA wrote:
>> Most emails (like the text messages here) do not
>> require HTML and should be sent as plaintext.
> I would say that no email requires HTML, only a very few emails
> benefit from it's use,
That eithe
Hello MFPA,
On Sunday, June 15, 2014 you wrote:
M> Hi
M> On Sunday 15 June 2014 at 2:06:02 PM, in
M> , Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
>> Well personally I like to have the ability to more
>> accurately express myself with bold or italics or even
>> underline.
M> I have that ability in plaintext,
Hi
On Sunday 15 June 2014 at 2:06:02 PM, in
, Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
> Well personally I like to have the ability to more
> accurately express myself with bold or italics or even
> underline.
I have that ability in plaintext, via the
fairly-universally-understood convention of:-
*bold*
/it
Hello Adrian,
On Saturday, June 14, 2014 you wrote:
AG> Sunday, June 15, 2014, 1:10:22 AM, you wrote:
>> Well, it helps only in making me realize **once again** that if I continue
>> to use
>> HTML (in all correspondence except those to TB!) I'm gonna have these
>> weird problems
AG> HTML
Hello MFPA,
On Sunday, June 15, 2014 you wrote:
M> Hi
M> On Sunday 15 June 2014 at 12:10:22 AM, in
M> , Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
>> Well, it helps only in making me realize **once again**
>> that if I continue to use HTML (in all correspondence
>> except those to TB!) I'm gonna have these weird
Hello MFPA,
Sunday, June 15, 2014, 12:53:20 PM, among other things, you wrote:
M> Hi
M> On Sunday 15 June 2014 at 8:43:22 AM, in
M> , Roger Phillips wrote:
>> It does not seem to matter what combination of choices I make about using
>> TB or OS html or whether I use TB rules or not,the
Hi
On Sunday 15 June 2014 at 12:10:22 AM, in
, Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
> Well, it helps only in making me realize **once again**
> that if I continue to use HTML (in all correspondence
> except those to TB!) I'm gonna have these weird
> problems. These problems all go away if I just switch
> to
Hi
On Sunday 15 June 2014 at 8:43:22 AM, in
, Roger Phillips wrote:
> It does not seem to matter what combination of choices
> I make about using TB or OS html or wnether I use TB
> rules or not,the completed 'reply' shows the insert in
> the proper place. However it does not fit with the
>
Hi
On Sunday 15 June 2014 at 5:36:58 AM, in
, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
> Most emails (like the text messages here) do not
> require HTML and should be sent as plaintext.
I would say that no email requires HTML, only a very few emails
benefit from it's use, and most of those would be better serv
Hello Jack,
Sunday, June 15, 2014, 1:10:22 AM, among other things, you wrote:
JSL> Well, it helps only in making me realize **once again** that if I continue
to use
JSL> HTML (in all correspondence except those to TB!) I'm gonna have these
JSL> weird problems. These problems all go away if I j
Hello Adrian,
On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 02:47:42 +0200 GMT (15-Jun-14, 07:47 +0700 GMT),
Adrian Godfrey wrote:
> Sunday, June 15, 2014, 1:10:22 AM, you wrote:
>> Well, it helps only in making me realize **once again** that if I continue
>> to use
>> HTML (in all correspondence except those to TB!) I
>HTML doesn't belong in email in the first place (if that "formatting" is
>actually important, put it in an attachment, e.g. PDF) and particularly not on
>mailing lists. Same goes for mail from "do not reply" and "no reply" addresses.
Unfortunately the wold went in a different direction. HTML em
Sunday, June 15, 2014, 1:10:22 AM, you wrote:
> Well, it helps only in making me realize **once again** that if I continue to
> use
> HTML (in all correspondence except those to TB!) I'm gonna have these
> weird problems
HTML doesn't belongin email in the first place (if
tha
Hello Roger,
On Saturday, June 14, 2014 you wrote:
RP> Hello Jack,
RP> Friday, June 13, 2014, 9:56:34 PM, among other things, you wrote:
JSL>> Hello TBUDLs,
JSL>> I have a question regarding inserting reply text into the quoted body
JSL>> of the original email. If I see something to which I s
Hello Jack,
Friday, June 13, 2014, 9:56:34 PM, among other things, you wrote:
JSL> Hello TBUDLs,
JSL> I have a question regarding inserting reply text into the quoted body
JSL> of the original email. If I see something to which I should reply
JSL> midway in the body of the original email, I'll
Hello TBUDLs,
I have a question regarding inserting reply text into the quoted body
of the original email. If I see something to which I should reply
midway in the body of the original email, I'll hit RETURN to give me a
new line to insert my text. The original text will be broken at that
point
31 matches
Mail list logo
