Re: [Evolution] Reply "Outlook Style"
- From: Hans van der Merwe <hvdmerwe sunspace co za>
- To: Evolution <evolution-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [Evolution] Reply "Outlook Style"
- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 13:55:31 +0000
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 09:44 -0400, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 09:20 +0200, Hans van der Merwe wrote:
Now, some have also asked me why I send mail in plain text.
And.....why do I? HTML email is a "standard" (its got a RFC and
everything), so why not send in HTML? Silly formatting and colour
coding aside.
Because:
Sorry all this is getting OT, my last response, promise.
1. Plain text is also a standard
Yes, and
2. You almost never need the silly formatting and colour coding
Unless when it is required - like pointing out reply chunks etc
3. Everyone's ideas of appropriate formatting (e.g. fonts) and
colours tend to vary a lot, so messages are in my experience
visually noisy and actually *harder* to read than plain text.
Same can be said for any other way of communication. I can
foRmat
This also
sEmi
unreadablE
Proper programs will solve this.
And yes, Outlook is not one of them.
4. HTML mail can have embedded URLs and represent a security
problem
Only if the reader allow it.
Again, dont consider Outlook.
5. Using HTML increases the size of messages, which affects a)
storage space and b) bandwidth efficiency.
True, but this is true for all other web traffic - couple of extra tags
will surely not break the network. Tagging may even help with QoS.
My 2c worth
ps sorry for the inline, I know its a mailing list no no
E-Mail disclaimer:
http://www.sunspace.co.za/emaildisclaimer.htm
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]