I hesitate to make this thread longer...
Just my 2c.
HTML - please no.
It's bloated for this purpose and I've seen it (outside this list) introduce costly errors because of that. It brings new features that are not needed and more complex to master (I mean taking into account efficiency, compatibility, accessibility, etc.). It's useful for web, not for email. The fact that someone can write perfectly compliant, accessible and pleasing websites does not mean this someone will spend the same effort in every email message. HTML knowledge should be no requirement to participate in this list, so some users may be unaware of possibly pitfalls in their HTML messages. Also, users of text only email readers need not be excluded.
UTF-8 - yes, any standarised encoding, but UTF-8 is fine.
I don't like changing the names of other people. I like to copy them verbatim. There's people all over the world in this list. So I think the feature of being able to codify many of the characters in the world is useful. The fact that communication is in English (I wouldn't require it either) and my name can be written correctly in ASCII does not mean that everybody has to have names in ASCII.
I think these and possibly other arguments are stronger than message size. But I'm not implying that plain text vs HTML wastes the same space as ASCII vs UTF-8 for messages in English.
Thanks.
And i was joking.
ron
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Xavi Drudis Ferran xdrudis@tinet.catwrote:
I hesitate to make this thread longer...
Just my 2c.
HTML - please no.
It's bloated for this purpose and I've seen it (outside this list) introduce costly errors because of that. It brings new features that are not needed and more complex to master (I mean taking into account efficiency, compatibility, accessibility, etc.). It's useful for web, not for email. The fact that someone can write perfectly compliant, accessible and pleasing websites does not mean this someone will spend the same effort in every email message. HTML knowledge should be no requirement to participate in this list, so some users may be unaware of possibly pitfalls in their HTML messages. Also, users of text only email readers need not be excluded.
UTF-8 - yes, any standarised encoding, but UTF-8 is fine.
I don't like changing the names of other people. I like to copy them verbatim. There's people all over the world in this list. So I think the feature of being able to codify many of the characters in the world is useful. The fact that communication is in English (I wouldn't require it either) and my name can be written correctly in ASCII does not mean that everybody has to have names in ASCII.
I think these and possibly other arguments are stronger than message size. But I'm not implying that plain text vs HTML wastes the same space as ASCII vs UTF-8 for messages in English.
Thanks.
-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
-
ron minnich -
Xavi Drudis Ferran