3 ms·
If only they have decided to use something like markdown or rtf at the time. (Some mail clients do support it). IMO the problem with choosing HTML is that then
by yoz-y 9y ago
If only they have decided to use something like markdown or rtf at the time. (Some mail clients do support it).
IMO the problem with choosing HTML is that then it becomes tempting to embed a complete HTML rendering engine and try blacklisting elements or restricting it. This opens up a door for vulnerabilities. If e-mail used some format which only does formatting then it would be easier to avoid security problems.
- petepete 9y agoA simple Markdown dialect would have been perfect, but Markdown's ability to embed HTML would just lead to abuse. For emails, headings, quotes, code blocks, hyperlinks, images and bold/italic/strikethrough is surely enough. Perhaps tables. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed.
- yoz-y 9y agoWell, the advantage is that since e-mail is a plain text medium, it could be "forced" if clients started supporting it. And it would require zero hacks like this AMP thing and would also be 100% retro compatible if a markup language with sensible plain text legibility were chosen.
- Spivak 9y agoUp to your ability to modify the client there's absolutely nothing that prevents you from sending a multipart email with text/markdown as one of the options. Shoudln't break any existing email clients. Obviously very few clients will be able to read it, or even acknowledge that it exists but it's something. Maybe someone on the other end will appreciate it.