Wayne McGuire spoke:
> Many leading mail readers, like Eudora, have
> already fully embraced HTML standards (and will
> soon embrace XML standards). This trend has very
> much the feel of an unstoppable revolution in
> personal computing.
While we're flying way off topic here, I'd love to ask exactly
where I can find these "HTML standards" that everyone refers to.
Oh, I know about the W3C and HTML 3.2, etc., but those
"standards" behave VERY differently from IE 3.0 to IE 4.0 to
Netscape 3.0 to Netscape 4.0 to Netscape 4.0 in AIX, etc.,
etc., etc. I can't believe that people are so willing to
embrace a standard that is neither standard nor appropriate
for the medium of email.
HTML was designed to be a HYPERTEXT markup language. While its
use as such in an email message is, perhaps, interesting,
that's not what I see it used for most of the time. The
majority of HTML-embedded email messages I see use HTML for
color coding, font changing, boldfacing, etc. BIG WHUP.
Anyone care to point me to an example of a "revolutionary" use
of HTML in email? Something that makes the effort of wading
through all the CRAP worthwhile?
Just because some of us would like to be more conservative in
our embrace of *some* new technologies, doesn't mean we're
Luddites. That would be akin to blaming those of you who think
HTML-email is wonderful for the VHS-format or Win95 (I hope the
analogy is clear). Further, just because email readers a, b, or
c are HTML-"ready" doesn't mean that it's a good thing. It just
means that someone is trying to get more people to use their
program - there's a big difference between selling/producing the
most software and selling/producing the *best* software (see
previous analogy).
--
Chip Hart * chip@pcc.com
People's Computer Company * http://www.pcc.com/~chip
15 Pinecrest Drive * Work:800-722-7708
Essex Junction, VT 05452 * Fax: 802-872-8214
Follow-Ups:
|
|
