HTML mail (was: PHP contact manager)

Bill Freeman f at ke1g.mv.com
Tue Sep 27 12:16:17 EDT 2005


Bill McGonigle writes:
 > On Sep 27, 2005, at 08:50, Ben Scott wrote:
 > 
 > > But it was mangling your
 > > messages, making already cryptic output almost unreadable.
 > 
 > Ben, you need a MUA that can handle multi-part MIME messages.  Set it 
 > to show you the text/plain alternative.
 > 
 > I know I get mail with HTML-only content but I just see a blank message 
 > and unless it's from a client it goes straight to the trash.


Summary: Surprisingly, I pretty much agree with Ben.

	I see some instances of HTML only mail as well.  But I see
several other cases:

	My (admittedly non-mainstream) MUA sometimes does a good job
displaying HTML (e.g.; emphasis, images) while ignoring gratuitous
marketing attributes (color, typeface).

	Sometimes it displays the text/plain alternative (perhaps when
it finds the HTML to confusing to render?).

	But sometimes it seems not to recognize that there are parts
(though I can see some MIME division stuff) and simply presents the
text of the message.

	This last makes me suspect that some common MUA out there is
playing fast and loose with the HTML and/or MIME standards when it (or
they) generate HTML messages.  Wouldn't that be a surprise?

	On the other hand, I've got to ask why?  Having emphasized
text rendered bold is sometimes a very slight readability enhancement,
but by and large, I've derived no benefit from receiving mail with
HTML stunts, as opposed to getting plain text.  I don't consider
having spam or side advertisements come up glitzy to be a benefit.
Do you?

	You might say that it's nice to be able to click on links in
an HTML message (more the fool you, say I), but my MUA can pick out
URLs in text messages and make them click-able.  And note that I get
to see where the link goes, rather than just the link text.

	If you really need to send some HTML to a friend, zip it up
and send it as an attachment.  OK  Maybe that's beyond grandma or
little Timmy.  I wish it were beyond the few people who occasionally
feel that they have to send me 50Mb of "funny" pictures.



	It seems that HTML messages are from 3 to 10 (or even more)
times the size of the same information sent as text.  I'm on a
broadband link at the moment, but that varies.  Especially now that
it's becoming attractive to get E-mail via cellular, the cost per kb
transferred is becoming significant again.



	I'd like to see everyone interesting disable the sending of
HTML versions.  Then I could make the presence of HTML as the bulk of
the message a spam filtering parameter.  (Preferably at the ISP end of
the connection).

	The marketeers would be unhappy if we all started disabling
the ability to *receive* HTML mail.  But they should be comforted to
learn that it wouldn't actually reduce the amount of stuff that I buy
as a result of receiving E-mail offers.  Sadly, however, there are
apparently enough suckers.  (I wonder if there's any good data on the
number of people, like me, who attempt to remember who has spammed me
so that I can actively avoid doing business with them?)

							Bill

(My, but it's fun to vent!)



More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list