Wayne R. Boyer wrote:
> > DID I MENTION IT WAS A BAD IDEA?
> >
> >
>
> Well Stan I agree with you but... why do some people want to do this?  Is
the
> desire to HTML-ize email simply based upon a perceived need to 'pretty'
> things up?  Is there something that I am missing?

I almost never send HTML mail out, but I find it hard to understand the
animosity.  Bandwidth?  I haven't seen that as an issue since 28.8K modems
came out.  Accessability?  IE can read HTML text to blind people just as
well as text/plain.  Do magazines like Time and Newseek violate the spirit
of the ADA because they include pictures?  Please.

Although plain text is adequate for _most_ uses, it isn't *hard* to come up
with a few shortcomings, like the limited choices of *emphasis*.

Or, shall we bring up line breaks in URLS:
http://www.interex.org/conference/hpe3000solutions2002/agendad
etail.html

Try giving a table in plain text when most readers are going to render it in
variable width fonts, in addition to line wrap.
Region                              Percentage Undernourished
                                1969-71 1979-81 1990-92 1996-98
Sub-Saharan Africa                  34      37      35    34
Near East and North Africa          25       9       8    10
East and South East Asia            43      29      17    13
South Asia                          38      38      26    23
Latin America and the Caribbean     19      13      13    11
All Developing Regions              37      29      20    18


What, are y'all reading your email in Pine?  How Twentieth-Century!

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *