Since you have brought up the subject once again of using HTML or plain text
format for messages, let me express my opinion that it is not only difficult
to rapidly read unformatted text messages, but it becomes very unpleasant
indeed to read the original messages that are forwarded as a part of
replying to an unformatted text message. Just look at the text below as an
example. Formatting, and hence readability, is preserved when sending and
reply to messages using HTML formatting.

The ability of current email programs to display and preserve formatted text
makes reading email much simpler and more pleasant than reading a message
like this one. It also enables one to copy the text into another document
type and preserve the paragraph breaks. Imagine trying to copy and paste
Jim's message below into MS Word!

The file size difference between formatted text and unformatted is minimal.
The additional time taken to send and receive formatted messages is minimal.
If all exchanges were one-liners, then unformatted text would be acceptable,
as it is for SMS  on mobile phones. Since they are not, formatting is
preferable, as it certainly was for reading John's copy of the article in
his original email message.

Best regards,
Brent

  _____




-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Bill Potts
Sent: 5 May 2002 14:15
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:19929] Re: Some of you might find this interesting


Jim:

I found it in less than 15 seconds (by doing a Google search on tony bennett
christian metric).

It's at http://christian-voice.org.uk/CV02Jan.htm#4.

Like you, I would have preferred it if John had provided the URL (and had
changed the formatting of his message to text only).

Bill Potts, CMS
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of James Frysinger
> Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 11:06
> To: U.S. Metric Association
> Subject: [USMA:19927] Re: Some of you might find this interesting
>
>
> On Sunday, 2002 May 05 1239, kilopascal wrote:
> > THE CHRISTIAN AND COMPULSORY METRICATION
> >
> > By Tony Bennett
> ....
> > ... These are all units easy for the human mind to conceive and
> nearly all
> > of which can conveniently be divided into halves, quarters,
> sixths, etc.,
> > which is difficult in the metric system. ....
>
>       OK, so let's say that I've got this superb recipe calling
> for a quarter
> stone of flour and a sixth of a pound of butter and a fourth of a gill of
> water.....
>
>       Since you didn't send the URL, John, I am unaware of the
> source of this
> article. Where did you get it? Where was it published?
>
> Jim
>
> --
> James R. Frysinger                  University/College of Charleston
> 10 Captiva Row                      Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
> Charleston, SC 29407                66 George Street
> 843.225.0805                        Charleston, SC 29424
> http://www.cofc.edu/~frysingj       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cert. Adv. Metrication Specialist   843.953.7644
>
>

Reply via email to