231–240 of 263 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
It's not a like it's a vote. Most people didn't choose it. They had it because their corp uses Windows, and Windows came with IE, and IT did not allow other browsers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding 1. it's up to the client to parse and highlight links in plain text.
> Regarding 1. it's up to the client to parse and highlight links in plain text. If the client is interpreting the content and then displaying its interpretation to the user, then it's not plain text anymore, is it? It's a format; in this case it's a poorly-specified, ad-hoc format and broken format[1] that is worse than simply having a reduced ad-hoc HTML format. Just like HTML is "plain text" which is interpreted b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Regarding 1. it's up to the client to parse and highlight links in plain text. If the client is interpreting the content and then displaying its interpretation to the user, then it's not plain text anymore, is it? It's a format; in this case it's a poorly-specified, ad-hoc format and broken format[1] that is worse than simply having a reduced ad-hoc HTML format. Just like HTML is "plain text" which is interpreted b…
Fair, but url syntax is strictly defined in RFC 3986: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3986
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
It's not a like it's a vote. Most people didn't choose it. They had it because their corp uses Windows, and Windows came with IE, and IT did not allow other browsers.
A fully-featured HTML "document" is really an application, not a document at all, so it makes sense that mail clients limit support. But this fragmentation makes me yearn for a real standard here, an official non-application subset of HTML that doesn't allow fetching remote resources or executing code. Just a document format with embedded media, animations, styling, etc.
Is it a “document” if it has animations and non static (video) media?
The lower the score, the better. I know many who have a policy of "emails must be in plaintext only, with no attachments unless agreed to in advance; everything else gets deleted automatically."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HTML is not needed for attachments to work. If the government for example, banned all use of HTML in emails, people could still attach (non-HTML) files to emails the same way they do now. Therefore the comment I replied to, a defense of HTML in emails, is a bogus argument.
"I think HTML sucks" is a bogus argument. Why not HTML? At least it isn't RTF or some wonky SGML evolutionary dead-end.
Also, normies don't write HTML, but rather they depend on services (like Gmail) offered by corporations to transform their composition into HTML, which gives the corporations and avenue to track me or to try to persuade or influence me unless I want to respond by instructing my normie friend never to send me email.
In general, HTML email brings the privacy and security problems of the web to email.
Also, HTML makes email much harder to archive because an HTML document's legibility often depends on references (embedded in the HTML document) to files on the internet, and these references to online files tend to rot.
Some of us are tired of web tech spreading its tentacles everywhere, especially to technologies like email that were already useful and mature before web tech started spreading to them.
I wish there was something like BrowserStack but you send a test email and it shows you how it renders on tons of different email clients on various platforms. It wouldn't work for web-based email like Gmail but it would still be useful.
Most if not all also support stuff like deliverability, DMARC testing, Analytics, Accessibility, as well as web-based render testing. I think rendering engine wise, Testi@ has the largest device/platform coverage. Or at least last I checked.
And emails can totally be sent both as plaintext and HTML, so that the receiver can choose! I just don't understand why so many services only send a text/html version instead of both text/html and text/plain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon deserves zero credit for anything regarding E-mail, because their "order confirmations" don't say WHAT YOU ORDERED. Mind-bogglingly stupid and annoying.
I think that's because they don't want email providers, Gmail in particular, scraping for purchase history
Amazon's refusal to do so means you can't search your E-mail history for purchases (at tax time, for example). Or for warranty info or service. You may not know where you bought a particular item. Or which Amazon account you might have used.
If everyone followed Amazon's anti-customer example, you'd have to log into every E-commerce site you ever bought something from and search your order history... year by year... to find something. Unacceptable BS.