In Thunderbird: View | Message Body As | Plain Text This is always on and in my experience any email that becomes ineligible because of that is not worth my attention. On 8/21/23 19:05, John R Levine wrote: > While I greatly admire your ASCII art in principle, I regret to report that on my Android phone and iPad it's completely illegible. > > Much though some of us might wish otherwise, it's not 1990 any more, and fixed pitch ASCII text isn't what most mail programs expect or display. > > (On the other hand, if you'd sent HTML mail and wrapped it in <pre> or used <tt> it'd have looked fine. > > R's, > John > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > >> On 8/21/23 15:44, Christian Huitema wrote: >> What about | Simple proposal: we should move our culture to top-posting. No tool >> side-posting? | needed. Don't worry too much bout text/plain versus text/html. >> It's fun. | >>> I think that this | Or middle posting, where | thread clearly exposed the problem. Many IETF >>> participants follow | I inject my text right | the a long established practice of commenting on >>> email by editing the | in the middle of the | message and inserting their comments inline wit> the text. That | message. | practice does not align with the fraction of the >>> participants who prefer | I d v | top posting. It also does not align with >>> existing MUA that follow | o e | a variety of conventions for inserting >>> comments inline comments | c r | in response, to the point that after a few >>> replies it becomes very | a t t | hard to understand who exactly made what >>> argument. | n h i | >>> | a c | >>> As I mentioned in a | a t a | previous mail, the IETF could in theory enforce >>> that mail would be sent | l l | in text/plain, but this is not realistic, as >>> many participants either | s l | are accustomed to always use HTML or do not >>> have a choice. Besides, | o y | even a return to plain text would not solve >>> the confusion between | . | inline commenting and top posting, or the >>> formatting mess caused by different inline conventions of different >>> MUA. >>> >>> Moving to top-posting only would solve these issues. It will be a bit >>> less easy for some commenters, who would have to explicitly copy and >>> paste the fragments of message to which they reply, but it would >>> definitely solve the top-posting vs. inline comment issue. It would >>> also solve the issue with formatting of inline comments, because each >>> "top" message would stand on its own, and presumably be presented >>> exactly as its sender intended. >>> >>> If participants chooses to write in text/plain, their messages would >>> be presented accordingly, and if other participants chose text/html, >>> this would mostly work too. The only ambiguity would be multipart >>> messages with different content in text/plain and text/html -- but >>> here too, the solution is probably in the culture. >>> >>> -- Christian Huitema -- Marc Petit-Huguenin Email: marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
