- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:57:35 +0100
- To: Pierre Saslawsky <pierre@photobiker.com>
- Cc: public-html-mail@w3.org
On Friday, February 23, 2007, 7:36:30 AM, Pierre wrote: PS> If you try to constrain HTML mail to what people legitimately need PS> for Instant Messaging and blog comments, you will end up with a rich- PS> text subset of HTML which is all but doomed to failure. I agree you end up with a rich text subset; its not clear why its doomed to failure. Its common to see, for example in a form for adding comments to a blog, 'some HTML markup allowed'. And typically this is for emphasis, color and font size changes, perhaps adding inline images; ie exactly the rich text functionality. PS> The possibilities offered by browser engines are promised to be used PS> more and more by emailers. Yes and no. Its certainly easier, for the implementors of a MUA, to simply include, for example, the MS IE ActiveX component for HTML, or to include the Gecko engine. However, to offer a personal perspective - one reason that I chose my current MUA (The Bat!) is that it has its own HTML display component which does not execute scripts, does not fetch external images, and is less likely to have zero-day security flaws exploited. PS> CSS is a good example, especially with PS> positioning and editable content. It will allow companies to design PS> their own templates and produce corporate-looking documents directly PS> into the emailer instead of having to send PDF files or MS-Word PS> documents as attachments. Yes, where a complete HTML attachment is created and where the HTML engine both understands CSS to some reasonable level and can deal with cid URI schemes (in the case of external stylesheets), that would be a good way forward. PS> Another area of development should be forms. It would allow an email PS> client to compose a message based on an XML-based form template PS> stored on an intranet or a trusted web site. The recipient could PS> access the same template, fill-out the data and return it to the PS> sender, or submit the data to a web site directly from the emailer. PS> Why not for instance allow URLs in the recipients list? Clicking PS> "Send" would mail the completed form to the email recipients with PS> SMTP and submit the data to the specified URLs with HTTP. Can the action URI for a form itself be mailto: IIRC it can. PS> Besides the PS> convenience of filling out small forms instead of redacting verbose PS> text responses to common requests, users would also benefit from PS> being able to keep a copy of the forms they complete inside their PS> outbox. Good point. PS> Isn't it curious to see how people can archive all the data PS> they receive for years but still can't keep a trace of the forms they PS> fill out nor the comments they post on the web? Yes (unless the form itself offers the option to mail a copy, which can be done on a case by case basis) PS> While numerous standards have been developed in the past 15 years to PS> improve the browsing experience, very little has been done for email. PS> As people begin to take advantage of what modern emailers are capable PS> of doing in the receiving end, vendors will continue to improve their PS> products on the composing end - meaning that more standards will be PS> supported, not less, and richer documents will transit over the wire, PS> not poorer - and then it will only be a short time before the market PS> pushes for interoperability between email and web. Yes. I don't often generate HTML mail myself, but one reason to do so has been the improved Unicode support in HTML compared to many mailers plain text capabilities. PS> I hope the orientation taken by this mailing list won't be "How can PS> we confine HTML mail to technologies of the past?" but "How can we PS> make email benefit from the current and future standards?" Preventing PS> people from using available features rarely works. Agreed. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Interaction Domain Leader Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Friday, 23 February 2007 15:57:27 UTC