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

201–210 of 263 posts

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

#201

Post by tormeh »

mike31fr wrote: post #168
jpecar wrote: post #166

Soooooo happy that my mail client is not even on the list here. It automatically strips out anything remotely looking like html and it sends out plain text emails only, as email was designed to be and should still be. Anyone sending me css garbage will be directed to /dev/null. Thanks.

Reminds me of someone I knew 15 years ago, who often said "Anyone sending me text messages with abbreviations doesn't deserve a response". Sadly, now this guy has hardly any friends.

Text messages with abbreviations come from real people. Emails with HTML and CSS are almost all automated, and usually some kind of spam.

(Some email clients for humans probably add a bit of html and css to everything, but you get what I mean. It still looks like plain text)

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

#202

Post by arp242 »

prmoustache wrote: post #191
arp242 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not. Markdown is markdown. It can render to HTML, but that's a different thing. I struggle to understand why this is even a point of contention.

Since it supports any HTML tag, it is irrelevant. Mandate markdown and MTAs and marketing departments will send you markdown only made of pure HTML.

That's quite the pivot from "markdown is HTML". But no, it probably shouldn't support HTML tags, or support it with limits. And maybe also a few other things like #-headers also shouldn't be supported as it can be too easily to do by accident. All of that seems pretty obvious in all but the most aggressively pedantic reading.

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

#203

Post by Vinnl »

easton wrote: post #160
rjzzleep wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What an excellent resource! (And yes Outlook is a pain and supports so very little!) So outlook today is the internet explorer of mail?

It literally is, Outlook for Windows uses the IE9 engine to render HTML email, IIRC. And even then not everything is supported.

Which is an improvement over when it used to use the Word engine to render HTML email, IIRC.

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

#205

Post by pquki4 »

rakoo wrote: post #167
ktosobcy wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. all links are click-able at this point; what's more plain-text would force to provide just a link without all the tracking garbage 2. you can have paragraphs and headings... it's just a matter of structure - using html you can write a wall of text just fine 3. not sure if needed, besides you can attach images to plain text (though not inlining) or click-able links to external sources (at exact place) 4. still - ea…

> what's more plain-text would force to provide just a link without all the tracking garbage I'm glad that you never ever received any link to some derivation of st.es.rui.tracking/bzzz/pfrrrrt?campaign=hn that hide the real link, but in the real world, that's how tracking is done. Plain text doesn't prevent anything. > not sure if needed, besides you can attach images to plain text (though not inlining) or click-abl…

> Don't make the mistake to assume that your specific experience is a workable average.

Sadly many people on HN do exactly this, as seen in comments like

"I don't use a phone and don't have a phone number, so I can't pass the anti-spam check of xx website. It is their fault"

"Why do we need a UI for this? Command line is much better than this"

"Why do we need to do this? I have been installing applications by compiling from source since 199x and it has worked perfectly fine for me."

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

#206

Post by dustedcodes »

nedt wrote: post #179
dustedcodes wrote: post #177

I can't figure out how to use it. When I enter " Test " rel="nofollow">https://example.org>Test " it says "No results found. Why not suggest this feature to be added?". When I enter " " I get "AMP for email", "BIMI", "accent-color" and lots of other CSS attributes starting with "a" as result. When I enter "a" I get the same as above. How do I check if I can email the HTML Anchor tag? The input says "HTML, CSS, ..." b…

You might have been unlucky searching for the a element that's really short. And very basic HTML would work everywhere. But you might be more happy to go via the feature list: https://www.caniemail.com/features/

LOL ok that was just a really unfortunate coincidence. I used the tag because I knew it would/should be supported everywhere so wanted to test the website with an input where I know what response to expect :)

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

#207

Post by joe8756438 »

willdr wrote: post #194
iamacyborg wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can quite quickly lead to clipping in gmail if you’re not careful though.

can you elaborate?

the mjml components unpack to a very large number of html tags. so depending on how you structure the doc it can exceed the gmail doc size with a surprisingly small amount of content

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

#208

Post by pembrook »

jpecar wrote: post #166

Soooooo happy that my mail client is not even on the list here. It automatically strips out anything remotely looking like html and it sends out plain text emails only, as email was designed to be and should still be. Anyone sending me css garbage will be directed to /dev/null. Thanks.

Have you ever come across the insanely rare use case of wanting to put something in italic or bold?

Or even more insane, maybe wanting to add a link in an email?

Or, you ever purchase anything online? It’s kind of nice to have line items in receipts and an image of the thing I bought. But then again, I’m an irrational human who enjoys things like “aesthetic readability.”

As a true purist, do you also exclusively program in Machine code? Because that’s how all software was originally designed to be.

Seems silly to get religious about it.

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

#210

Post by dzhiurgis »

carbonatom wrote: post #192
dzhiurgis wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No u. I understand if you are manager/owner you might be running comms via email. But internally all of that went to slack for good reason - lack of history is a feature, not a bug.

> I understand if you are manager/owner you might be running comms via email. But internally all of that went to slack for good reason - lack of history is a feature, not a bug. I am neither manager nor owner. Just another 1x engineer. 75% of my comms run over email. 25% over Jabber. Not every software company uses Slack!

Well you are not op to begin with and admit running a chat app which is has 99% chance of having better UX than email.

Email is good for having common interface. In my case it's ~abused in 99% of cases.

Also - you do not mention how much non-comms emails do you receive. While chat apps are fucky in terms of lock-in, lack of interop and tons of other things, lack of spam is nice.

Post reply on HN