On 3/29/10 10:37 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote: > David E. Ross wrote: >> On 3/28/10 5:17 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >>> Terry R. wrote: >>> >>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >>>>> Terry R. wrote: >>>>>> I can compose an HTML document (and of course depending on how >>>>>> extreme the formatting is), and the size won't be much more than >>>>>> 10%-20% of it's plain text counterpart. And zero errors. >>>>> You might be able to do that, Terry, (and so could I) but most HTML >>>>> email clients sure can't. Do you get email from, say, yahoo mail >>>>> users? A one or two sentence message runs around 13-16KB usually. >>>>> Here's a small snippet from a four-sentence message I got yesterday >>>>> via yahoogroups. >>>>> [snip code] >>>>> >>>>> The 302 lines of *styling* were in a second<head> section after all >>>>> the HTML and content! Oh, and viewing the email in HTML, it is just >>>>> the four lines in the Georgia font. No other formatting was applied >>>>> by the sender. >>>> I can't speak for Yahoo mail, and I don't know anyone that uses it >>>> offhand. >>> Really? I'd say about 20-25% of the mail I get comes from yahoo. >>> >>>> But I was responding directly to David's comment of, >>>> >>>> "If a 1 MB plain-text message were instead composed as an >>>> HTML-formatted message, the result would be approximately 4.6 MB. >>>> And it would likely have approximately 21,000 HTML syntax errors." >>> Heh, I'm sure that was a misuse of MB .. where he meant KB (which would >>> be about right, a typical 4 to 1 ratio. The email I cited has 67 words >>> (357 bytes), and from Yahoo needed 13 Kilobytes of HTML. >>> >>> Or he may just have been exaggerating for fun. >>> >>>> and I believe he overstated the numbers quite a bit. Maybe if the >>>> email was sent as PT & HTML using Word, but not just HTML, and not >>>> the error count either. >>> Ewww. Word, as the editor for OE, does a *terrible* job of HTML. >>> >> >> I was replying to Bill Davidson, who wrote about >>> Doesn't stop 1MB plain text either. >> >> If messages actually got that size, the equivalent message in HTML >> formatting would be about 4.6 times that. This is based on my >> examination of 20 actual HTML-formatted messages that I collected from >> my inbox earlier this year. As it happens, my wife has a friend who >> regularly sends HTML-formatted messages in the 600 KB to 1.5 MB range (a >> very few at large as 4 MB). My wife ignores them, leaving them on our >> ISP's mail server until I use a Web-mail capability to delete them. >> > I suspect those messages include embedded graphics and the like. Do you think > those images would be smaller if they were attached to text as just mime > attachments? > > Getting a multi-MB message isn't a problem with HTML, it's a problem with > clueless friends. >
I you would read my <http://www.rossde.com/internet/ASCIIvsHTML.html>, which I cited earlier in this thread, you would see under "Methodology" the following: "I excluded any attachments (which, for HTML-formatted messages, means excluding any images or background), links to attachments, the section for marking a message as spam (added by my ISP's mail server), and the header section of each message." The sizes from which I computed bloat DID NOT INCLUDE IMAGES. For the actual HTML-formatted messages, I copied the message source from just after the <x-html> tag to just before the </x-html> tag and pasted the result into a new file; I then considered the size of the resulting file. For the equivalent ASCII-formatted messages, I copied the body of a displayed HTML-formatted message from my E-mail client and pasted the result into a new file; I then considered the size of the resulting file. The sizes for each of the 20 messages -- both HTML and ASCII -- are shown in a table at the end of my cited Web page. You might think that images in an HTML-formatted message traverse the Internet embedded within the message. Actually, images travel separately, as attachments. Similarly, there is a separate transfer of a file for each image in a Web page. -- David E. Ross <http://www.rossde.com/> Go to Mozdev at <http://www.mozdev.org/> for quick access to extensions for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and other Mozilla-related applications. You can access Mozdev much more quickly than you can Mozilla Add-Ons. _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
