HTML posting

[Jonathan Hutchins]

Quoting Jason Clinton <me at jasonclinton.com>: 
 
> I don't really have an opinion on this but to be fair, I can think of a  
> couple of instances where HTML mail would be better. 
  
> * Word wrapping. The age-old problem of selecting a wrap width that will  
> be mostly compatible. In HTML, you just put quoted messages in  
> <blockquote>s. The renderer's computer is responsible for pagination and  
> breaking. 
 
I can't recall the last plain-text editor I saw that wouldn't wrap text.  
Better and more consistently than HTML, which sometimes doesn't wrap (and 
sometimes won't horizontal scoll either). 
 
> * Accessibility. In plain text, nothing tells a screen reader that a  
> line by itself is a header. In markup, this is indicated. 
 
Headers are marked in text messages, and the body doesn't need markup. 
 
> As for backwards compatibility, all HTML email clients have that built  
> it. Messages are generally sent with both a plaint text and HTML version  
> of the message.  
 
Right - so why clutter up the bandwidth with the unnecessary HTML?  This is 
niether a math- nor a foreign language list. 

---------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through tarcanfel's horde/imp system