> Can I email plaintext?
> No results found. Why not suggest this feature to be added?
It's worth sending a pull-request.
Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
161–170 of 206 posts
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a bigger issue than most people care to admit. I post stuff to a number of different sites that support "Markdown" and not a single one agrees on even something a simple as how to format a hyperlink. I end up having to hit the help page on every site to remember which syntax they use, if they even support the feature at all. HTML might be "ugly", but at least it is consistent.
I wish there was a browser extension to handle that. It would provide an editing area that would allow you to edit using the same markup on different sites, and when you are done would translate to whatever markup format that site uses and fill in the site's edit area with that.
There are some bits of typical markdown syntax that I really don't like. Like pasting code requires you to add 4 spaces to the start of every line and an extra linefeed between each line. That's a lot of work and every time I do it I say "How is this better than ?"
I've yet to see what I'd really like: preformatted text being surrounded by markers that make it easy to paste in, like so:
Some regular text
vvvvv
Preformatted text
^^^^^
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#163> Can I email plaintext ? > No results found. Why not suggest this feature to be added? It's worth sending a pull-request.
Plaintext? Is that a new CSS framework? /jk
Very few enterprises these days provide a “Text only, please” option in their E-Mail subscription options. Jira is, by all means, terrible software, but at least they do have this feature. I guess it's one of those situations where few people understand what it is and why you would want that. And even less people who care.
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#164Anyone wanna chime in on conversion rates when it comes to styled vs. plain text? I always hear that the latter converts better, i.e. "Make it look like as if it was sent by a friend" and obviously it's a business related matter but I wonder why plain isn't used more often when visuals/emotion aren't the #1 selling points.
Thinking in terms of "conversion rates" feels to me like the reason why we're in this mess. Email to me isn't about conversion and advertising newsletters. It's about written information, so there's no reason to even support HTML, in most cases. Arguably there's situation where an image will help in conveying information, or where a table will make information more readable. There's no situation where CSS is required…
Include an URL to any external content. All URLs are plaintext, ideally.
My 3845743985793847948 gigabyte Linux ISO. Is here, in email-contextual plain text: http:/linux.iso/3845743985793847948/gib
My xes tapes? All stored at this address http://xes.sepat/all
What's the problem. Email works. Without formatting.
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#165I'm all over for using cutting edge CSS solutions but when it comes to HTML email, I'm just: Hello ... ... Thanks! and it's done :)
Let's fix your comment:
% I'm all over for using cutting edge CSS solutions but when it comes to HTML email, I'm just:
% Hello %
...
%...
% Thanks!Let's make two billion dollars great again. Unpolitically.
% and it's done :)
Die poor.
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
HTML in email helps readability, titles, lists, tables does help the recipient.
Nothing that cannot more elegantly be solved by using MarkDown ... ... or common sense.
Or you could say at a plaintext email first paragraph: You have to use your own fun/gun for this, and just type in plain text.
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#167> Can I email plaintext ? > No results found. Why not suggest this feature to be added? It's worth sending a pull-request.
I wonder what content-types email clients support besides HTML and plaintext. Would any support mp3, mp4, markdown, org or odt?
EDIT: Hmmm found this[1], and this[2]. They talk about using TROFF, TEX, Postscript, voice data, etc. I wonder if something like that ended up implemented somewhere.
EDIT 2: I opened an issue[3].
[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1049
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#168It would be really nice to have a small and simple markup language, say some markdown standard, to be the layouting language for E-Mails. No (external) images, just links, lists, headings, basic formatting. HTML E-Mails are a security nightmare, even if "only" CSS is "allowed" and JS/iframes/external images are not loaded.
Markdown is nice for composing, but not as a standard to be supported by many clients. CommonMark is an improvement, but there is way to many ambiguities and differences in supported features over different markdown parsers for it to be feasibly used as a standard. Markdown is also not any better than HTML in terms of security - most markdown parsers allow passing through arbitrary HTML, and then depend on sanitizing…
Why is markdown so popular? It seems so braindead.
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
Markdown is nice for composing, but not as a standard to be supported by many clients. CommonMark is an improvement, but there is way to many ambiguities and differences in supported features over different markdown parsers for it to be feasibly used as a standard. Markdown is also not any better than HTML in terms of security - most markdown parsers allow passing through arbitrary HTML, and then depend on sanitizing…
Why is markdown so popular? It seems so braindead.
# why is markdown so popular?
## (my opinion)
Markdown is fast to type for the majority of use cases since you have:
- bullet points
- headings
- __bold__
- __italic__
- `inline code`
- etc
```
fn you_even(_have: &str) -> &str { "nifty little code blocks without needing to indent" }
```
And more importantly, markdown syntax preserves the structure of the document without harming legibility, unlike say latex or HTML. That limits it, since the syntax is small, but also reduces friction in learning/writing markdown.
Also, Reddit + GitHub.
Re: Can I Email: ‘Can I Use’ for email
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Markdown is nice for composing, but not as a standard to be supported by many clients. CommonMark is an improvement, but there is way to many ambiguities and differences in supported features over different markdown parsers for it to be feasibly used as a standard. Markdown is also not any better than HTML in terms of security - most markdown parsers allow passing through arbitrary HTML, and then depend on sanitizing…
Why is markdown so popular? It seems so braindead.
[deleted]