Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3394 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [SLE] Plain text vs HTML text....
- From: juergen.braukmann@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Juergen Braukmann)
- Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:57:57 +0100
- Message-id: <38BD8455.FF2D5654@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jon Pennington wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Bobby Geortgilakis wrote:
> > <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
> > <html>
> >
> > <br>Hi all,
> > <p>I've had some feedback, that "many" (two actually so far....), on the
> > list are HTML challenged & would like to check this out on the list
> > proper.
> > <p>So, is HTML a hassle to enalbe/read or are the plain text guys still
> > stuck in the 1950's, not that is is the year 2000 or anything like that?
> > ;-)
> > <p>Greek Geek :-)
> > <br>
> > <p>Calligraphy rules! -- Greek Geek</html>
>
> Actually, I am using a reasonably modern mail client (KMail), and I can't read
> this garbage without saving the message to a file, doing something like `w3c
> -dump filename > filename2', then trying to cut and paste filename2 into a
> reply. Then you have the headache of somebody reading a long thread, deciding
> to post to it, and then mangling everything in that reply to conform to the
> so-called HTML standard.
>
personally, I *hate* HTML stuff, particulary in lists. This is still
good here, but in the samba list it's all HTML source. I do not mind
HTML for personal mail, since I use netscape. Had a HTML mail from a
friend. The instant I pressed reply, netscape went bang. It was written
with word97, had a lot of garbage and 8 short lines of text. 80% garbage
HTML info...
I can accept the occasional error by misconfiguration, my fears are that
the "new" and "nice" stuff turns to be a "standard", claimed to be "the
standard" by people that use it. The help you get from a list won't be
better if you use a big colored font in a cry for help, maybe even less.
There are "easy" ways onverting to plain text, maybe in the list
archives. I sort HTML stuff to a special folder (were Jon's answer
popped up as well) and usually delete the stuff.
> The truth is that there are only a handful of mail clients (actually,
> Nutscrape Mail is the only one that comes to mind) that truly handles HTML
> *natively*. pine and mutt (amongst others) can be *adapted* (through the use
> of a .mailcap file) to read it, but they promptly make any reply standard text.
>
> True, some of us <waving hand in the air> use mail clients that are
> feature-poor or otherwise sub-optimized; does that mean we should be punished
> for choosing software that suits our needs? Should we be ostracized from the
> community that values individuality above all else? Hell, let's make it so
> that any messages not sent with Microsoft Outlook 2000 are automatically
> rejected by the transport agent at suse.com!! Is everybody with me?!?!
At this time I am. Some are still forced by circumstances to use M$ (I
use exchange at work. sending to the list from there would *instantly*
turn me into ashes by the flames from the list, caused by all the
rubbish that exchange / our X400 gateway adds to a mail...) I realy like
to see HTML vanish, cause the attitude of some HTML mailing people makes
my blood boil.
Juergen
>
--
=========================================== __ _
Juergen Braukmann juergen.braukmann@xxxxxx| -o)/ / (_)__ __ ____ __
Tel: 0201-743648 dk4jb@db0qs.#nrw.deu.eu | /\\ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /
===========================================_\_v __/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
--
To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxx
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@xxxxxxxx
Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/
| < Previous | Next > |