Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(April 1998)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: HTML-enabled mailing lists
From: johnjohn @ triceratops . com
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 22:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
To: list-managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: <116338B0A28AD1118E6400AA005B102B04F521@pumba.ed-com.com> from "Woodrick, Ed" at Apr 1, 98 09:28:45 pm

> Why do yall go through so much trouble to not utilize existing Internet
> messaging standards? 

Standards?  What's the RFC that limits SMTP traffic to HTML?  I seem
to have forgotten it...

> The overhead of an HTML message is pretty small. 

Well, the message containing your email came to me in plain text -and-
an HTML'ized copy.  So taking a mail sample from an HTML'ized mail
advocate (yourself), the overhead is over 100% of the actual message.

> I wouldn't be surprised if it was near the overhead of a UUENCODE!

Really?  If I accept your comparison at face value, than all the
more reason to not have HTML'ized messaging.  mailing lists aren't
the place for uuencoded binaries, unless they're created explicitly
for that purpose.
 
> It's just so disconcerting to me that some of the folks who are long
> time residents of the Internet, a mechanism that many call so radically
> state-of-the-art, that you would have such an archaic attitude. Don't
> you feel like a dinosaur in Disneyland? Going around growling and
> everyone else ignoring you?

Why did you send a text copy of this message?

> HTML is here to stay. If you want to provide a service to you list
> users, then you probably should start thinking about how to work WITH
> your subscribers than against them. 

None of my subscribers have asked me to double the bytes received
from my mailing lists while keeping the same content level.  Speed,
consistancy, and high signal/noise ratio is what's important to 
list users.

> Granted, not everyone has a mail reader that will read HTML, but at what
> percentage do you make HTML a standard? And for those of you who are
> stuck on UNIX using readers that only stand regular text messages, don't
> gripe and complain that the rest of us decided to move on and leave you
> in the 60's. Plain text messaging is on the way out. Corporate messaging
> systems have been rich text for many years.

*yawn*  your assertions are meaningless to me.

BTW, apologies to those who cannot read the VRML copy of this message.

> Lead, Follow, or get out of the way!

Again, I ask, why did you send a plain text copy of your message?

The answer: so people will read your message instead of ditching it.

Think about that for a bit...

John
--
John White
Triceratops Admin
johnjohn@triceratops.com


References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: HTML-enabled mailing lists
From: Lawrence Weeks <dev@dm2.deskmedia.com>
Next: Re: HTML-enabled mailing lists
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: HTML-enabled mailing lists
From: MowMow Kitty <kitty@squonk.net>
Next: Re: HTML-enabled mailing lists
From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com