This is the mail archive of the cygwin-talk mailing list for the cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: html email

Ethan Tira-Thompson wrote:
Resending as per Mike's PPIOSPE (not sure why the 'reply' to you went private, unless your original mail was private to me? In which case PPIOSPE back-atcha :)

"Mike"? Who's "Mike"? :-)
As for your question, your question, a: because I can't set reply-to (AFAIK Thunderbird doesn't let you set it on individual groups, which is needed as I also subscribe to several non-Cygwin lists which would not be amused if my reply-to was a Cygwin address), and b: because I CC'd you, not knowing if you were watching cygwin-talk. Welcome! Watch for falling hippos. Anyway, yes I did send to you privately, but *also* to the list. :-) But no worries, you're here now.

And since you're here, I'll copy my reply (sans prior clarification) for anyone else's benefit.

All of those links you provide are arguments against HTML-only email.

(Right, because I meant "HTML *mail*", as clarified above and in private mail :-). So I've snipped the bits that were only relevant to that slip on my part.)

I agree that's a bad idea. But when most mail programs send both plain text and HTML, the arguments are moot. As long as the plain text version is there, what's the big deal?

Keep in mind that this is a *mailing list*, and there are additional concerns... like digests, archives, and that the list is proactively preventing people from abusing HTML for nefarious purposes. That, and you forgot the bandwidth issue.

There's a well defined way to support both plain text and rich text in email. I don't see why the plain text crowd has to say the rich text crowd can't coexist when there's a viable way to support both.

In a word, bandwidth.

If you plan to highlight your example code (and by what standard?), you have too much time on your hands.
Standard? Keywords are blue, comments are red, that kind of thing needs a standard?

Oh? Funny, when I look at source, keywords are green, comments are gray, normal text is cyan, etc, and everything has a dark blue background. See what I mean? :-) There are many ways to highlight code, and not all are the same. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, I'm just pointing out that you and I may have different ideas on how it should be done.

In any case, when I copy and paste code from my editor, it can retain the syntax coloring. It's very straightforward. But even so, piping it through enscript isn't difficult either if I was on a lesser platform.

Never saw that; what editor do you use? Anyway, AFAIK KATE doesn't do this (and I *dare* you to call it/KDE a "lesser platform" :-)).

We are Microsoft. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. --Badtech

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]