Took a peak, saw tag, left.
Name another way of invisibly embedding a JSON object in HTML in every browser without requiring CSS.
It wouldn't be JSON, but semantic markup would be another option. (Not that I agree with the GP here, just saying.)
Email Markup in Gmail
41–50 of 113 posts
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why can email not evolve? Structured data in markup works well on the web. It's open and could be implemented by any client.
It's only ever going to work for gmail users. For people who read their email in text-only clients this will never do anything. You know, people who use serious email, not to send pictures of balloons and 96-pt Happy Birthday in pink on purple text.
It's only ever going to work for gmail users. For people who read their email in text-only clients this will never do anything.
Why not? If anything, this should been a boon for us text-only client users, since the metadata is structured in a format that can be easily parsed and displayed in an appropriate way, instead of having to deal with HTML conversions.
Having a key shortcut on Alpine to activate the main email action, instead of having to cycle over the various links, sounds great to me.
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#43ugh, leave email alone!
What's your specific complaint? This is about the markup in an html email, it actually has very little to do with "email" proper.
Moreover, other providers are free to support this markup as well.
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#44Took a peak, saw tag, left.
Name another way of invisibly embedding a JSON object in HTML in every browser without requiring CSS.
Since you asked, one option would be to simply include it as an alternative part in the MIME message (which email is). In fact, I would argue, that’s the correct option.
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Name another way of invisibly embedding a JSON object in HTML in every browser without requiring CSS.
It wouldn't be JSON, but semantic markup would be another option. (Not that I agree with the GP here, just saying.)
I guess semantic markup is the full featured sibling to microformats.
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#46This is a bad thing. Gmail needs to be e-mail and nothing more or this is EEE.
I totally agree.
Besides, what is wrong with HTML? And why doesn't it render properly in the gmail client?
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Name another way of invisibly embedding a JSON object in HTML in every browser without requiring CSS.
It wouldn't be JSON, but semantic markup would be another option. (Not that I agree with the GP here, just saying.)
Yeah, they could use RDFa, which actually can represent the exact same info (they're both encodings of Linked Data). Still, this actually makes it easier for people who dislike them to filter them out of the emails.
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#48This is a bad thing. Gmail needs to be e-mail and nothing more or this is EEE.
Why can email not evolve? Structured data in markup works well on the web. It's open and could be implemented by any client.
It's only "open" in that they detail the spec they've come up with. Email has been so useful and resilient only because it's an open standard which is broadly agreed on and adopted.
Once the big players start adding custom features on top of existing protocols we start seeing fragmentation and parts of the market being cornered off. Once people start depending on this custom functionality, the vendor usually starts raising the walls to lock people in (see GTalk -> Hangouts.)
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wouldn't be JSON, but semantic markup would be another option. (Not that I agree with the GP here, just saying.)
I guess semantic markup is the full featured sibling to microformats.
Microformats are actually a kind of limited semantic markup, but here they're using JSON-LD, which can represent/encode any Linked Data, as far as I know (though they only support the schema.org ontology).
Re: Email Markup in Gmail
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why can email not evolve? Structured data in markup works well on the web. It's open and could be implemented by any client.
It's only "open" in that they detail the spec they've come up with. Email has been so useful and resilient only because it's an open standard which is broadly agreed on and adopted. Once the big players start adding custom features on top of existing protocols we start seeing fragmentation and parts of the market being cornered off. Once people start depending on this custom functionality, the vendor usually starts r…
It's only "open" in that they detail the spec they've come up with.
The spec is schema.org, which is a format defined by multiple parties, not just Google: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schema.org
And it's encoded using JSON-LD, which is also not a Google creation, and it's standardized by the W3C.