On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 05:22:38PM -0600, Nico Williams wrote: > On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 10:34:01AM -0800, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 05:24:48PM +0000, tom petch wrote: > > > On 01/03/2021 14:22, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > Yes HTML is a disaster for email. But so is plaintext wrapped at 66 > > > > characters by the server because people didn't know better. > > > > > > > > The reasons HTML is a disaster are > > > > > > > > 1) There is no standard for HTML in email. > > > > 2) HTML has been turned into a presentation format. > > > > 3) Email messages used annotations for a decade before HTML which doesn't > > > > support them > > > > 4) The SMTP email infrastructure does not provide a viable means of knowing > > > > what formats are accepted by a recipient so there is no way to fix this. > > > > > > And breaks privacy. I find it ironic that the IETF seems to devote > > > forests to combating a slight possibility of privacy being impaired, > > > something that I see bordering on an obsession, but actively supports > > > HTML e-mail which drives a coach and horses through privacy. > > > > I don't think I understand what you refer to by "actively supports HTML > > e-mail". Could you please clarify? > > To me it was clear that Tom meant "some IETF participants", not > something more formal like that the IAB has said HTML email is awesome > or whatever. That would make a lot of sense, though even with your prompt I'm having a hard time getting from Tom's text to yours. (FWIW, I myself perennially find myself reminding people that the official IETF mail archive (web) service only displays the text/plain component, so things like color and <div>s for quoting/indentation are lost.) -Ben
