HTML- Who uses it?

[alka]

Prompted by this thread, i thought i'd take a little survey about HTML email usage.

I for one, refuse to send them, and never really feel i have a need to compose one. I also have HTML disabled by default in my client and FM web to avoid tipping off spamers. i OCCATIONALY wish to enable it to view emails i want, however, i try my best to subscribe to lists that have text only options.

[mcowger]

I totally agree with alka....HTML mail is the devil!

[Sherry]

I'm looking forward to FM getting the HTML available to us. I like seeing email replies in a different color. I also like the idea of a smiley used to help soften the blow of something that may need to be said. Also, in business, it can come in handy. I am, however, against "overuse". New email users have a tendency to go overboard with "loud" emails.

Sherry

[FMRocks]

As I have said many times before, html can be used in good or bad ways. Used responsibly to create a professional email with needed bold, italics, and needed colors (minimal) can be beneficial. That's why I prefer html compose.

[bplat]

I concur with Sherry & FMRocks:- I know of one email newsletter that makes good use of HTML email; occasionally, I wish I could use it when composing mail using the web interface.

-bert

[Prognathous]

There was a big thread about this. Here a couple of posts from that discussion:

Originally posted by Prognathous
At last

For all you naysayers, there is one great reason to have HTML composition:
-> Support for right-to-left languages such as Hebrew and Arabic.

Isn't that enough? For a few million users of Hebrew (me included) and for a few hundred million users of Arabic it sure is enough!

BiDi (Bi-Directional) support means two highly important features:
1. Control over paragraph direction (RTL and LTR buttons).
2. Control over alignment (Right alignment and Left alignment button).

That's all we need.
You can keep all the other HTML features to yourself, I just want to be able to properly write emails using my mother tongue - Hebrew).

J&R,
Please include BiDi control in the HTML toolbar! We really need it!

Thanks,

Prog.

Originally posted by robmueller
HTML email composition has many good points. In fact, the idea behind HTML is a good idea, in so far as you have meta-tags to describe the content of your document.

The problem in my view is that most people abuse it to create way over the top fancy stuff that doesn't really actually help.

For instance, it's nice that I can highlight a particular word if I think it's important. The standard text only way is something like *this*, but it's not unambiguous like the HTML tags are, and the rendered can actually disply the highlighted word differently.

Also I can:
* Make a point about something
* And make another one

But it's more clear, and better for the rendered if I use:

• This to make a point
• And this, because it can wrap and render the item properly even if it's very wide and goes far off to the right, it'll wrap it underneath the starting point, rather than all the way to the left.

Just my 2 cents...

Rob

BTW, I'm with the "Sometimes send, dont mind recieving, really want, really need" group.

Prog.

[hadaso]

You know what? I lied in my vote. I voted "ALways send, hate receiving". It's a lie, because I send using only the fastmail web interface, so I am not able to send HTML.
But it's a white lie, because I will send when it becomes available in fastmail, and I would have sent if I could enter the HTML manually.

The reason I would send using HTML is that the email standard lacks some needed option, that HTML has.
The only thing I really need from HTML is the "DIR=RTL" flag, and if the plaintext email standard would have supported that HTML would not be needed by me. But it will not...

What I would really like in email is some math formula capability...

[DianeB]

HTML was one of my concerns, when debating on joining FM. Being a *tad* older, I need the larger font, which "s a" so kindly made me a new stylesheet for, or rather just tinkered a bit with a current one, to give it larger font for me. (Thanks again for that "s a", it was/is *greatly* appreciated. )

I agree with others, I would like HTML in order to be able to hi-light certain words to make them stand out more. Also, especially in sending emails to friends, sometimes I send them an email received from someone else & I want to make suggestions or comments, using a different color, so they know its my suggestion being made, along side the original email.

That being said, I hate it when folks overuse HTML, using a fancy background, tons of graphics, etc. that make it so long to load. Sometimes when scanning ebay, when they have all that (& some even include music), I 'X' out of the auction immediately & won't even take a peek at it. I don't have time to sit here with dial-up, waiting for so much junk to load. Simplicity, yes. Over-using, *no*.

I'm 100% for HTML & am patiently awaiting it's arrival, when/if FM decides to go with it.

~Diane

[psalzer]

I don't think there's a choice there for me: Never send, will view, if necessary, from trusted source.

[robinson]

I *never* compose in html and i don't like receiving html-mails.

But i *always* view my cnn-, slashdot-, and my isp-newsletters in html.

This is why i would like to be able to change the default settingsfor single folders...

example:
- default -> no html (set in account prefs)
- folder 'slashdot' and 'cnn' -> view html (set in folders screen)

[Gankaku]

I've several correspondants, and we all use color to mark our replies to each other. It's easier to find some red interspersed between the black text. We hate those > markers that mark their text against yours. Color is nice and clean.

Sometimes it's important to enclose an image. HTML allows you to see it right there in the message. It allows you to reply to a nicely formatted message with color and images without losing the format. It's ugly to have someone compose a nice message to me, and then I reply in my web interface with text. I've been asked multiple times why I'm not using HTML in my replies when I'm answering my mail from work.

I'm a visual person. I like colors, pictures and nice looking email.

[Prognathous]

Originally posted by hadaso
What I would really like in email is some math formula capability...

I wouldn't be surprised if Mozilla could do it. All you (probably) have to do is find a way to embed MathML in your emails and ask the recipients to use a MathML-compatible software.

Prog.

[brand new]

Plain text for me (howewer, I would like adoption of "format=flowed" standard for plain text and HTML composing to please everyone with an option to turn it on/off).

[oysterquartz]

I don't think that its rationale to frame an argument against HTML composition hased on the fact that some people may abuse it. I seldom use it to send, but it does have its place in some correspondence.

I think that it would be a benefit to many if integrated in the web interface.

[Prognathous]

Originally posted by Gankaku
I've been asked multiple times why I'm not using HTML in my replies when I'm answering my mail from work.

Why can't you use a mail client? note that as long as your workplace firewall doesn't block SMTP, you can still reply using HTML - even if IMAP is blocked (although it does need some extra configuration to work reasonably).

Prog.