6 ms·
The page footer might interest you. It directly answers your question. Quoting "But if plaintext is so good, why is this page written in HTML?" This is a
by DarkCrusader2 7y ago
The page footer might interest you. It directly answers your question.
Quoting
"But if plaintext is so good, why is this page written in HTML?"
This is a reference document, not an email, you twit.
- jve 7y agoFair. I like that minimal formatting there anyway. But often I have to communicate via email, report on complex issues, etc. It is nice to have some headings, tables, images in there.
- DarkCrusader2 7y agoAgreed. As much as I like plain text email personally, having inline images etc. is really helpful sometimes.
- mavhc 7y agoThe key is sometimes. Plain text by default, rich text when required. Software that would strip all html out of emails for security would be handy
- u801e 7y agoBefore MIME was common, people used to insert uuencoded data within the email message. IIRC, certain email clients would display the decoded content inline with the surrounding text.
- C1sc0cat 7y agoWhy not use MS Word or some other tool designed for writing documents then ?
- wongarsu 7y agoBut emails can be reference documents too! In fact I would argue most work emails that are longer than a few lines are a reference document of some sort.
- upofadown 7y agoThen you are better off using some format that can stand alone as a file such as PDF. If it is a reference document that is intended to be edited on an ongoing basis it is better to use something like a wiki. Having to root around in your email to find a reference document is pretty inefficient and annoying.
- wongarsu 7y agoAll of the reasons given against HTML emails hold at least equally well against PDF: it's a vector for phishing and tracking, ripe with client vulnerabilities, less accessible and not displayable on a terminal. For me as a reader having to read both an E-Mail and the attached PDF is also annoying, and many people will simply skip reading the PDF.
- throw0101a 7y ago> For me as a reader having to read both an E-Mail and the attached PDF is also annoying, and many people will simply skip reading the PDF. See also embedding (e.g.) a JPEG in a Word document and then attaching that Word document to an e-mail.
- na85 7y agoI've seen so many Word or PPT documents with a single hyperlink in them, uploaded to SharePoint with filenames like "process_manual_2013_v3.2.doc"... Ugh.
- throw0101a 7y agoJust ran across this: an HTML e-mail that is only a link (i.e., HTML <head> refresh): * https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ch83sz/why_the_hell_is_sending_html_files_via_email_only/ https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ch83sz/why_the_he...
- upofadown 7y ago
- dpau 7y agoha! and i really love the design of this site- just the right amount of design & css styling to elegantly communicate the message..
- DangitBobby 7y agoThat's pretty much a non-sequitur. HTML is better in email as well as "reference documents" according to the opinions of many. You don't like thing. Okay.
- 6c696e7578 7y agoRFC 822 is plaintext. That's a reference document. Don't see why HTML would be an argument for a reference document. In fact, tex is a good format for reference documents, it diff's well and can produce .ps/.pdf outputs among others.
- a3n 7y agoThe very last clause in that sentence answers a question that I hadn't even thought to ask. I thought it was very odd for what is essentially a marketing post.
- holy_city 7y agoAm I crazy for using email to send memos? Those serve as reference documents too, while creating a papertrail.