Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

caniemail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 263 posts

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#71

Post by cypherpunks01 »

barkbyte wrote: post #53
cypherpunks01 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, I didn't really fully understand that about SVG. Thanks for the info. From what I'm reading, it seems that from inside an SVG script, you can call out to javascript functions of the parent page? That seems kinda surprising, I'm sure there are security policies around it, but it means that there are potential security and performance risks/considerations around hosting and serving SVG files that I didn't realize…

The comment you’re replying to is misleading. SVG supports JavaScript but only if you load the SVG directly in your browser or inline it fully into the DOM. Using it as a normal image tag, by reference or with inlined data:, it’s inert and harmless from a JavaScript perspective. However, for a long time browsers were susceptible to denial of service attacks from maliciously crafted XML files, which SVG could exploit.…

Ahh ok thanks for the clarification, that makes sense

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#72

Post by shortformblog »

ryanbigg wrote: post #66

What an excellent resource! (And yes Outlook is a pain and supports so very little!) We've tried building email templates for notifications for our apps where I work, and it has typically been a pain. We have since swapped to using mjml ( https://mjml.io/ ) to build the templates, and it's working wonders. The output seems the be the most compatible with all different devices that we've tested on. The other tool we e…

MJML is easily the best tool of its kind and I use it a lot. If anyone is trying to build emails in 2024, it's a major shortcut that helps avoid and mitigate some of HTML email’s biggest headaches.

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#73

Post by gertop »

throw0101c wrote: post #67
StableAlkyne wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a completely valid opinion, and I prefer plaintext as well But at this point, it's pretty clear that most non-technical people prefer emails with fancy text and graphics. Personally, I'm just glad that email is a flexible enough medium to allow that. It's better than the alternative, where people moved to some closed, proprietary protocol behind like 20 patents that allows the same thing. Is there any other co…

> But at this point, it's pretty clear that most non-technical people prefer emails with fancy text and graphics. And what percentage of e-mails from people / human beings have those things? Certainly marketing e-mails have fancy formats, but I've rarely seen any person at a companies I've worked at use any kind of formatting: generally most folks hit reply and start typing with whatever the default is. Hardly any it…

Any e-commerce email showing you pictures of what you bought. People tend to find this convenient.

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#75

Post by pavo-etc »

zzzkkk wrote: post #54
Eric_WVGG wrote: post #48

HTML email was such a tragic mistake. I think the whole mess could have been averted if Markdown had been invented about twenty years earlier.

Is this intended as sarcasm? Markdown renders to html, it's an authoring syntax that happens to be readable in it's "code" state. How would it solve email? The real issue is bespoke rendering engines instead of just using a rule of "everything the current browser can do, but no js".

If emails could be marked up with the subset of HTML that Markdown is able to generate without having inlined HTML tags, email markup would be so pleasant. Just bold/italics, some headings, tables, properly flowing text, code blocks, horizontal rule, links, and images.

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#76

Post by dylan604 »

wongarsu wrote: post #46
dylan604 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most popular only because it was included with the OS and most IT departments did not allow use of other browsers. Just because it was the most installed does not make it the most popular. There was an old saying, "Internet Explorer: the most used browser to download another browser."

IE 4 and 5 were pretty good. ActiveDesktop was pretty cool. XMLHttpRequest turned out to be revolutionary. It was only after triple whammy of Netscape being unable to further compete, the dotcom crash and the antitrust suit against Microsoft's integration between Windows and IE that IE got deprioritized by MS and slowly turned into the underfeatured mess every developer hated.

IE for Mac was atrocious. Woz has some interesting thoughts about it in his book iWoz.

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#77

Post by gertop »

dylan604 wrote: post #31
jolmg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's reminiscent of IE, being the most popular and underfeatured.

Most popular only because it was included with the OS and most IT departments did not allow use of other browsers. Just because it was the most installed does not make it the most popular. There was an old saying, "Internet Explorer: the most used browser to download another browser."

You're being a revisionist. The claim that it wasn't popular is just dumb. For years it was simply superior to all other browsers (both technologically and users liking it).

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#78

Post by hollerith »

anamexis wrote: post #70
throw0101c wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The point is that attachments are needed to make HTML work. They are not. MIME headers are helpful for telling MUAs what the content (type and/or disposition) of a message is, but there's nothing from stoping mail clients from just putting "raw" HTML in the body of an e-mail message without MIME.

Yes, obviously you could just email HTML before MIME existed. That's not the point of the discussion at hand.

This is bad logic, and so is your comment upthread, IMHO.

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#79

Post by dylan604 »

lolinder wrote: post #40
dylan604 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most popular only because it was included with the OS and most IT departments did not allow use of other browsers. Just because it was the most installed does not make it the most popular. There was an old saying, "Internet Explorer: the most used browser to download another browser."

That was a saying later in the game and among techies. Website usage stats indicate that in 2007 a solid 67% of people were using IE, and that didn't drop below a majority of usage until mid-2010. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

I remember hearing stats about the continued high numbers for IE, but a lot of those numbers were attributed to pirated copies of XP being used in China. Maybe it was why IE6 seemed to hang around as high as it was. Just a clarification of the numbers that I found interesting.

Re: Caniemail.com – like caniuse but for email content

#80

Post by jolmg »

dylan604 wrote: post #31
jolmg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's reminiscent of IE, being the most popular and underfeatured.

Most popular only because it was included with the OS and most IT departments did not allow use of other browsers. Just because it was the most installed does not make it the most popular. There was an old saying, "Internet Explorer: the most used browser to download another browser."

> Just because it was the most installed does not make it the most popular.

It kind of does:

> popular - prevailing among the people generally --- https://www.dictionary.com/browse/popular

I didn't mean to say most preferred.

Post reply on HN