15 Mar
1998
15 Mar
'98
4:45 a.m.
<Text. If the e-mail that you wish to respond to's in plain text, that's
<what it'll send. The problem is that if M$ supports it, the WHOLE WORLD
<suddenly has to all have HTML-ized e-mail readers. It's nice if you hav
<it, but a pain in the A** if you don't.
There is the little matter of some several million (or more) unix(linux,
and related cuzins) systems out there where HTML is far from a standard.
For me and many of the hybrid users HTML means slow, slower and special
utilities to handle it and for what? What a waste of bandwidth.
Allison
15 Mar
15 Mar
4:20 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1548 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19980315/da5b196b/at…
9:27 a.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
There already is, it's called Netscape.
--
mor(a)crl.com
http://www.crl.com/~mor/
<Text. If the e-mail that you wish to respond to's in plain text, that's
<what it'll send. The problem is that if M$ supports it, the WHOLE WORLD
<suddenly has to all have HTML-ized e-mail readers. It's nice if you hav
<it, but a pain in the A** if you don't.
There is the little matter of some several million (or more) unix(linux,
and related cuzins) systems out there where HTML is far from a standard.
While it's obviously going to be possible to write an HTML mail client for
linux (or any other unix) -
9:31 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 2008 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19980315/982832fc/at…
10:41 a.m.
That is much better. :)
Dan
Greg Troutman wrote:
Dan Stephans II wrote:
I don't argue that HTML rich text is fine for
mailing lists,
however if you are going to argue that it is not you should formulate a
proper argument.
Try starting with the opposite premise - it has always been considered
to be
inconsiderate to post anything other than plain ASCII text by mail
unless
_explicitly_ requested otherwise by the recipient.
Now formulate a good arguement for posting HTML _especially_ to a
classic
list.
(Dons asbestos suit and runs for cover ;-)
Regards
Pete
5:09 a.m.
Umm, HTML is pretty much a standard no matter what platform you are on as it
is most certainly not platform dependent. The standard for 1.1 is specified
in RFC 2068 and for 1.0 in RFC 1945. If you mean that there are not standard
tools to read html'ized mail under unix/linux, I say Netscape is available
for almost any linux and most other unices running on sparc/intel/alpha
hardware. I don't argue that HTML rich text is fine for mailing lists,
however if you are going to argue that it is not you should formulate a
proper argument.
Cheers,
Dan
Allison J Parent wrote:
<Text. If the e-mail that you wish to respond
to's in plain text, that's
<what it'll send. The problem is that if M$ supports it, the WHOLE WORLD
<suddenly has to all have HTML-ized e-mail readers. It's nice if you hav
<it, but a pain in the A** if you don't.
There is the little matter of some several million (or more) unix(linux,
and related cuzins) systems out there where HTML is far from a standard.
For me and many of the hybrid users HTML means slow, slower and special
utilities to handle it and for what? What a waste of bandwidth.
Allison
4:26 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1109 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19980315/4f0da28b/at…
5:16 a.m.
Umm, HTML is pretty much a standard no matter what platform you are on as it
is most certainly not platform dependent. The standard for 1.1 is specified
in RFC 2068 and for 1.0 in RFC 1945. If you mean that there are not standard
tools to read html'ized mail under unix/linux, I say Netscape is available
for almost any linux and most other unices running on sparc/intel/alpha
hardware. I don't argue that HTML rich text is fine for mailing lists,
however if you are going to argue that it is not you should formulate a
proper argument.
Cheers,
Dan
Allison J Parent wrote:
Try running Netscape on Xenix-86.
8-(
Bill
16 Mar
16 Mar
11:56 a.m.
Umm, HTML is
pretty much a standard no matter what platform you are on as it
Try running Netscape on Xenix-86. 
15 Mar
15 Mar
8:09 a.m.
On Sun, 15 Mar 1998, Dan Stephans II wrote:
Umm, HTML is pretty much a standard no matter what
platform you are on as it
is most certainly not platform dependent. The standard for 1.1 is specified
in RFC 2068 and for 1.0 in RFC 1945. If you mean that there are not standard
tools to read html'ized mail under unix/linux, I say Netscape is available
for almost any linux and most other unices running on sparc/intel/alpha
hardware. I don't argue that HTML rich text is fine for mailing lists,
however if you are going to argue that it is not you should formulate a
proper argument.
You missed the point. There is no argument. As far as I'm concerned,
there's absolutely no point to sending e-mail as HTML.
Allison said it best though...
What a waste of bandwidth.
And how.
Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
Coming Soon...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0
See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
9:18 a.m.
Dan Stephans II wrote:
I don't argue that HTML rich text is fine for
mailing lists,
however if you are going to argue that it is not you should formulate a
proper argument.
Try starting with the opposite premise - it has always been considered
to be
inconsiderate to post anything other than plain ASCII text by mail
unless
_explicitly_ requested otherwise by the recipient.
Now formulate a good arguement for posting HTML _especially_ to a
classic
list.
(Dons asbestos suit and runs for cover ;-)
Regards
Pete
5:33 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 804 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19980315/5e8202aa/at…
9:43 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1116 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19980315/024996d9/at…
8:45 a.m.
But we don't want people to think that unix is just some dusty old beast
that you can't view HTML mail on. Metamail is one that works, and of
course Netscape is available for a SunOS/Solaris, Linux, Sco, etc.
Personally, I get some kind of sick satisfaction in using my Atari 1200XL
to access the internet, through a shell account. There's obviously no X
environment for it and no PPP/SLIP for it either so I am all text all the
time. It is a RPITA to have to wade through two hundred lines to get
someone's "Hey, how's it going?" I'd love to just skip them, but I
feel
guilty just deleting my grandfather's messages without reading them. It's
hard enough to get him on the net, let alone teach him how to properly
configure his mail browser. ;-)
It does seem a bit silly that we are making our email messages bigger and
bigger with sound and graphics and at the same time populating our
networks above the existing capacity....
Aaron
On Sun, 15 Mar 1998, Allison J Parent wrote:
<Text. If the e-mail that you wish to respond to's in plain text, that's
<what it'll send. The problem is that if M$ supports it, the WHOLE WORLD
<suddenly has to all have HTML-ized e-mail readers. It's nice if you hav
<it, but a pain in the A** if you don't.
There is the little matter of some several million (or more) unix(linux,
and related cuzins) systems out there where HTML is far from a standard.
For me and many of the hybrid users HTML means slow, slower and special
utilities to handle it and for what? What a waste of bandwidth.
Allison
9626
days inactive
9627
days old
13 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
aaron＠wfi-inc.com -
adept＠mcs.com -
allisonp＠world.std.com -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
dastar＠wco.com -
mor＠crl.com -
pechter＠shell.monmouth.com -
pjoules＠enterprise.net -
scott＠saskatoon.com -
shoppa＠alph02.triumf.ca