I certainly understand the concept. In fact, I remember well the days of
uuencode and uudecode. And I know html and message headers use up more
bandwidth. Still, I was surprised to find the total in excess of 3Mb. I
don't remember how small I had to make the picture file to get it out,
and it wasn't difficult -- I think I dropped the from 600 (my picture
was in work to be a digital painting) to 300 (which is way more than
sufficient to display on most folks' 98dpi monitors.
But 20-40 pct? If I'd not had the experience, I'd not have believed
it. As it is, I don't doubt it.
On the other hand, I still don't understand what's happening with
Versamail. There's a setting that says Get: that I've set to Entire
Message. AND there's a setting that says Maximum message size: that I
have set to 5120 KB because that's the maximum size allowable.
But why would there be two settings for essentially the same decision?
Jeffrey Kaplan wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 07:53:54 -0400 J Messeder said:
>
>
> Properly constructed HTML messages bodies are a bit over twice the size
> of a plain text message, because it should have a plain text section
> and an HTML section. Which one is shown to the recipient depends on
> the capabilities of their email client. So if a plain text message,
> including headers, would be 2k, then writing the same message in an
> HTML writing client should be about 3.1k. HTML doesn't really bulk up
> the message more than that unless you're doing really fancy or stupid
> things like constantly changing the text layout as you go, including
> embedded elements such as graphics, java/javascript, or CSS and as far
> as I'm concerned, anyone who does THAT (the scripting in email) should
> have their fingers removed at the shoulder. Or maybe the neck, I
> haven't quite decided yet.
>
>
--
/The erasure of a human subspecies is largely painless -- to us -- if we
know little enough about it. A dead Chinaman is of little import to us
whose awareness of things Chinese is bounded by an occasional dish of
chow mein. We grieve only for what we know./
A Sand County Almanac, /Aldo Leopold, July 1949/
