- From: Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 12:03:06 +0000
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- CC: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org
Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: > I am speaking about conversation messages that imply > editing - replies. Highly desirable to use WYSIWYG while > editing of these messages. It is 21st century and we > still doing plain text messaging on public-*html* mail > list. Shame on us? > (Yeah, why do I need to put '*' to mark <strong> spans?) Why "shame", Andrew ? ASCII (or, these days, Unicode) text is readable by everyone, and contains almost no overheads; what possible benefit do you see in inflicting the overheads of HTML (or RTF, or any similar "rich text" encoding) on something as simple and straightforward as an e-mail message ? Speaking purely personally, I abhor both HTML and RTF for e-mail, and find hand-formatted (72 character or fewer per line) absolutely perfect for the task in hand. Philip TAYLOR
Received on Sunday, 15 February 2009 12:03:44 UTC