* Editing email replies @ 2002-08-30 3:15 pd 2002-08-30 14:54 ` Barry Margolin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: pd @ 2002-08-30 3:15 UTC (permalink / raw) I've been thinking about how to edit replies to MIME messages that use multipart/alternative. For example, suppose the message has a text/plain alternative and a text/html alternative, as shown below. When I insert some plain text in my reply, I'd really like the resulting message to have the two alternatives for the text before my insertion, then my insertion in plain text, and then the two alternatives after my insertion. In other words, I want to go from: multipart/alternative text/plain text/html to multipart/mixed multipart/alternative text/plain text/html text/plain <--- my reply! multipart/alternative text/plain text/html I've shown this in more detail below, but that's the general idea. Essentially, I want to split the alternative part into two, and put my text/plain reply in between them. So, is there a way to do this? I'm planning to use emacs, but I don't know if there's a suitable mode for editing messages that does this. Thanks very much, -pd Detailed example follows. I hope it's correct. ============= Before editing ============= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----BAR" ... ------BAR Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is the first line of the original message. This is the second line of the original message. ------BAR Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <HTML> <BODY> <BR>This is the first line of the original message. <BR>This is the second line of the original message. </BODY> </HTML> ------BAR ============= After editing ============= Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--FOO" --FOO Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----BAR" ... ------BAR Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is the first line of the original message. ------BAR Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <HTML> <BODY> <BR>This is the first line of the original message. </BODY> </HTML> ------BAR --FOO Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My insertion between the first and second lines goes here. --FOO Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----BAR" ------BAR Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is the second line of the original message. ------BAR Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <HTML> <BODY> <BR>This is the second line of the original message. </BODY> </HTML> ------BAR --FOO ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-08-30 3:15 Editing email replies pd @ 2002-08-30 14:54 ` Barry Margolin 2002-08-30 15:38 ` Peter Davis 2002-08-30 15:51 ` Peter Davis 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Barry Margolin @ 2002-08-30 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <erBb9.37325$kp.567963@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>, pd <pd@world.std.com> wrote: >I've been thinking about how to edit replies to MIME messages that use >multipart/alternative. For example, suppose the message has a text/plain >alternative and a text/html alternative, as shown below. When I insert some >plain text in my reply, I'd really like the resulting message to have the >two alternatives for the text before my insertion, then my insertion in >plain text, and then the two alternatives after my insertion. > >In other words, I want to go from: > > multipart/alternative > text/plain > text/html > >to > > multipart/mixed > multipart/alternative > text/plain > text/html > text/plain <--- my reply! > multipart/alternative > text/plain > text/html This seems like it would be extremely difficult to automate, because Emacs would have to determine which parts of the plain and HTML alternatives correspond to each other, so that it can find the correct dividing points. -- Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-08-30 14:54 ` Barry Margolin @ 2002-08-30 15:38 ` Peter Davis 2002-08-30 16:34 ` Barry Margolin 2002-08-30 15:51 ` Peter Davis 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Peter Davis @ 2002-08-30 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw) Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.net> writes: > In article <erBb9.37325$kp.567963@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>, > pd <pd@world.std.com> wrote: > >I've been thinking about how to edit replies to MIME messages that use > >multipart/alternative. For example, suppose the message has a text/plain > >alternative and a text/html alternative, as shown below. When I insert some > >plain text in my reply, I'd really like the resulting message to have the > >two alternatives for the text before my insertion, then my insertion in > >plain text, and then the two alternatives after my insertion. > > > >In other words, I want to go from: > > > > multipart/alternative > > text/plain > > text/html > > > >to > > > > multipart/mixed > > multipart/alternative > > text/plain > > text/html > > text/plain <--- my reply! > > multipart/alternative > > text/plain > > text/html > > This seems like it would be extremely difficult to automate, because Emacs > would have to determine which parts of the plain and HTML alternatives > correspond to each other, so that it can find the correct dividing points. I agree that it seems difficult. Yet some e-mail programs do this (or something like this, I guess). If someone sends me a message with blue, sans-serif text, I can reply and put comments interspersed with that text. The resulting message still has the original sender's text in blue, sans-serif text, and my comments interspersed in Courier (or some other plain text font). Possibly this is because the program is displaying and editing the text/html, and it only has to find the corresponding point in the text/plain segment, rather than the other way around (editing the text/plain, and trying to find the corresponding point in text/html). I don't know, but somehow it works. Thanks, -pd -- -------- Peter Davis Funny stuff at http://www.pfdstudio.com The artwork formerly shown as prints List of resources for children's writers and illustrators at: http://www.pfdstudio.com/cwrl.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-08-30 15:38 ` Peter Davis @ 2002-08-30 16:34 ` Barry Margolin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Barry Margolin @ 2002-08-30 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <k7m8uzl3.fsf@bitstream.com>, Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> wrote: > >Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.net> writes: >> In article <erBb9.37325$kp.567963@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>, >> pd <pd@world.std.com> wrote: >> >I've been thinking about how to edit replies to MIME messages that use >> >multipart/alternative. For example, suppose the message has a text/plain >> >alternative and a text/html alternative, as shown below. When I insert some >> >plain text in my reply, I'd really like the resulting message to have the >> >two alternatives for the text before my insertion, then my insertion in >> >plain text, and then the two alternatives after my insertion. >> > >> >In other words, I want to go from: >> > >> > multipart/alternative >> > text/plain >> > text/html >> > >> >to >> > >> > multipart/mixed >> > multipart/alternative >> > text/plain >> > text/html >> > text/plain <--- my reply! >> > multipart/alternative >> > text/plain >> > text/html >> >> This seems like it would be extremely difficult to automate, because Emacs >> would have to determine which parts of the plain and HTML alternatives >> correspond to each other, so that it can find the correct dividing points. > >I agree that it seems difficult. Yet some e-mail programs do this (or >something like this, I guess). If someone sends me a message with >blue, sans-serif text, I can reply and put comments interspersed with >that text. The resulting message still has the original sender's text >in blue, sans-serif text, and my comments interspersed in Courier (or >some other plain text font). My guess is they're doing the following: Discard the plain text Render the HTML into a buffer Add a quoting prefix to the buffer Let you edit the buffer, word-processor style Turn the buffer back into HTML and plain text alternatives. -- Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-08-30 14:54 ` Barry Margolin 2002-08-30 15:38 ` Peter Davis @ 2002-08-30 15:51 ` Peter Davis 2002-08-31 16:21 ` Kai Großjohann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Peter Davis @ 2002-08-30 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw) Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.net> writes: > In article <erBb9.37325$kp.567963@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>, > pd <pd@world.std.com> wrote: > >I've been thinking about how to edit replies to MIME messages that use > >multipart/alternative. For example, suppose the message has a text/plain > >alternative and a text/html alternative, as shown below. When I insert some > >plain text in my reply, I'd really like the resulting message to have the > >two alternatives for the text before my insertion, then my insertion in > >plain text, and then the two alternatives after my insertion. > > > >In other words, I want to go from: > > > > multipart/alternative > > text/plain > > text/html > > > >to > > > > multipart/mixed > > multipart/alternative > > text/plain > > text/html > > text/plain <--- my reply! > > multipart/alternative > > text/plain > > text/html > > This seems like it would be extremely difficult to automate, because Emacs > would have to determine which parts of the plain and HTML alternatives > correspond to each other, so that it can find the correct dividing points. Actually, I just tried this with a certain well-known commercial e-mail package whose name starts with "E". What I got was a single multipart/alternative section, containing a text/plain and a text/html. However, the reply line I inserted had been inserted into both parts! That seems even more complicated. Thanks, -pd -- -------- Peter Davis Funny stuff at http://www.pfdstudio.com The artwork formerly shown as prints List of resources for children's writers and illustrators at: http://www.pfdstudio.com/cwrl.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-08-30 15:51 ` Peter Davis @ 2002-08-31 16:21 ` Kai Großjohann 2002-08-31 23:18 ` Peter Davis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2002-08-31 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw) Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> writes: > Actually, I just tried this with a certain well-known commercial > e-mail package whose name starts with "E". What I got was a single > multipart/alternative section, containing a text/plain and a > text/html. However, the reply line I inserted had been inserted into > both parts! That seems even more complicated. Wild guess: the E package threw away the text/plain alternative and let you edit text/html. For sending, it took the text/html stuff that you edited and sent a text/plain alternative of it. You might wish to test it by replying to a message which has aaaaa in the text/plain and bbbb in the text/html alternative :-) kai -- A large number of young women don't trust men with beards. (BFBS Radio) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-08-31 16:21 ` Kai Großjohann @ 2002-08-31 23:18 ` Peter Davis 2002-09-01 2:02 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Peter Davis @ 2002-08-31 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw) Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-15?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) writes: > Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> writes: > > > Actually, I just tried this with a certain well-known commercial > > e-mail package whose name starts with "E". What I got was a single > > multipart/alternative section, containing a text/plain and a > > text/html. However, the reply line I inserted had been inserted into > > both parts! That seems even more complicated. > > Wild guess: the E package threw away the text/plain alternative and > let you edit text/html. For sending, it took the text/html stuff > that you edited and sent a text/plain alternative of it. > > You might wish to test it by replying to a message which has aaaaa in > the text/plain and bbbb in the text/html alternative :-) Seems likely that that's what it did. Still, I'd like *some* way to edit such messages in emacs (with MH or gnus). I've actually had people complain to me that when I reply to their messages, all the formatting that they put in is lost. Ideas? -pd -- -------- Peter Davis Funny stuff at http://www.pfdstudio.com List of resources for children's writers and illustrators at: http://www.pfdstudio.com/cwrl.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-08-31 23:18 ` Peter Davis @ 2002-09-01 2:02 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri 2002-09-01 2:58 ` those who know me have no need of my name 2002-09-02 16:05 ` Peter Davis 2002-09-01 5:17 ` Charles Muller [not found] ` <mailman.1030857423.3550.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> 2 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Kevin A. Scaldeferri @ 2002-09-01 2:02 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <wuq68vnf.fsf@bitstream.com>, Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> wrote: >Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-15?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) writes: > >Seems likely that that's what it did. Still, I'd like *some* way to >edit such messages in emacs (with MH or gnus). I've actually had >people complain to me that when I reply to their messages, all the >formatting that they put in is lost. > >Ideas? Tell those people to shut up and stop their whining? ;-) On this topic, what I'd like is a way to tell MH to discard the HTML part in this case and just include the plain text portion in my reply. -- ====================================================================== Kevin Scaldeferri Calif. Institute of Technology The INTJ's Prayer: Lord keep me open to others' ideas, WRONG though they may be. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-09-01 2:02 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri @ 2002-09-01 2:58 ` those who know me have no need of my name 2002-09-02 16:05 ` Peter Davis 1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: those who know me have no need of my name @ 2002-09-01 2:58 UTC (permalink / raw) in comp.mail.mh i read: >On this topic, what I'd like is a way to tell MH to discard the HTML >part in this case and just include the plain text portion in my reply. sounds like you might prefer running all html parts through ``lynx -dump'', and re-tag them as text/plain, on the way into your mailbox. -- bringing you boring signatures for 17 years ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-09-01 2:02 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri 2002-09-01 2:58 ` those who know me have no need of my name @ 2002-09-02 16:05 ` Peter Davis 2002-09-02 21:59 ` those who know me have no need of my name ` (3 more replies) 1 sibling, 4 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Peter Davis @ 2002-09-02 16:05 UTC (permalink / raw) kevin@sue.its.caltech.edu (Kevin A. Scaldeferri) writes: > In article <wuq68vnf.fsf@bitstream.com>, Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> wrote: >>Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-15?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) writes: >> >>Seems likely that that's what it did. Still, I'd like *some* way to >>edit such messages in emacs (with MH or gnus). I've actually had >>people complain to me that when I reply to their messages, all the >>formatting that they put in is lost. >> >>Ideas? > > Tell those people to shut up and stop their whining? ;-) Well, I know I'm probably in a minority here, but I actually think HTML e-mail is a pretty good idea. You can get much more readable, and more *meaningful* content with HTML. Typographic conventions of using boldface, italics, etc. evolved for a reason ... they improve the readability and informativeness of text. I agree that we're bombarded by HTML spam from users with flagrant disregard for email etiquette, let alone typographic design. Still that doesn't invalidate the medium. Sorry. I work for a font and electronic publishing company, so this is a favorite soapbox of mine. -pd -- -------- Peter Davis Funny stuff at http://www.pfdstudio.com List of resources for children's writers and illustrators at: http://www.pfdstudio.com/cwrl.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-09-02 16:05 ` Peter Davis @ 2002-09-02 21:59 ` those who know me have no need of my name 2002-09-02 23:07 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: those who know me have no need of my name @ 2002-09-02 21:59 UTC (permalink / raw) [fu-t set] in comp.mail.mh i read: >Sorry. I work for a font and electronic publishing company, so this >is a favorite soapbox of mine. in which case you should think that html sucks, given how little actual control exists over what the receiver will see. -- bringing you boring signatures for 17 years ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-09-02 16:05 ` Peter Davis 2002-09-02 21:59 ` those who know me have no need of my name @ 2002-09-02 23:07 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri 2002-09-03 1:14 ` Sacha Chua 2002-09-07 17:19 ` Benjamin Riefenstahl 3 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Kevin A. Scaldeferri @ 2002-09-02 23:07 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <sn0s4bu6.fsf@bitstream.com>, Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> wrote: > >Well, I know I'm probably in a minority here, but I actually think >HTML e-mail is a pretty good idea. You can get much more readable, >and more *meaningful* content with HTML. Typographic conventions of >using boldface, italics, etc. evolved for a reason ... they improve >the readability and informativeness of text. I hardly ever see people use HTML in their email for these purposes. Usually they use it to make their text medium gray over a blue sky background image, or some similar nonsense. (That's actually a relatively tasteful, if pointless example. I've also seen some incredible attrocious uses of a half dozen colors of text and such.) Then there are the mail programs which think that every line should be wrapped in DIV tags so that it looks exactly like the author saw it... as long as you are using the same mail program as the author. -- ====================================================================== Kevin Scaldeferri Calif. Institute of Technology The INTJ's Prayer: Lord keep me open to others' ideas, WRONG though they may be. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-09-02 16:05 ` Peter Davis 2002-09-02 21:59 ` those who know me have no need of my name 2002-09-02 23:07 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri @ 2002-09-03 1:14 ` Sacha Chua 2002-09-07 17:19 ` Benjamin Riefenstahl 3 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Sacha Chua @ 2002-09-03 1:14 UTC (permalink / raw) Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> writes: > Well, I know I'm probably in a minority here, but I actually think > HTML e-mail is a pretty good idea. You can get much more readable, > and more *meaningful* content with HTML. Typographic conventions of > using boldface, italics, etc. evolved for a reason ... they improve ... or you can use Gnus and see smileys and _all_ *sorts* of /emphasized/ text. =) Seriously. Gnus is cool. And it comes with Emacs, too. Why not HTML mail? Well, HTML mail calls on w3 for rendering - still a bit slower than text. Also, many HTML messages are malformed, which means I get quite a few warnings when rendering it. Not everyone has a built-in HTML browser, too. What, would you so easily ignore all the pine and mutt users who have to launch an external process in order to read your mail? =) Not only that, a lot of formatting gets munged when you translate it back to plain text. And of course, I don't really trust HTML because of the sneaky things it could do. On some popular operating systems, it could even lead to a compromise of your system. =) Or think of webbugs - those little images that tell another server that your e-mail account is valid, read often, and ready for spam. What about Javascript? Pfft. Still, properly used HTML can be really, really nice. I feel that sending HTML should be a conscious choice, not the default. Plain text is enough for many of our thoughts. <laugh> (There are people who send me large .DOC files with _plain text_ inside it! Pfft.) For the people who want more, well... they can mime-attach an HTML page. <g> It's probably just me, but I find plain text more readable - no one trying to do any fancy tricks with colors, bold, or fonts, or whatever. ASCII art's probably the fanciest thing you can do with a plain text message (and even that can be a bit unreliable since some people use variable-width fonts). HTML is fine in the hands of people who know what they're doing, but for the most part, people don't. Still, I'm not going to force everyone else to use text/plain - thankfully, Gnus takes care of all of that automatically (most of the time, that is - w3 complains a fair bit). Yet another reason why Emacs is good. =) -- Sacha Chua <sacha@free.net.ph> - 4 BS CS Ateneo geekette interests: emacs, gnu/linux, wearables, teaching compsci ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-09-02 16:05 ` Peter Davis ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2002-09-03 1:14 ` Sacha Chua @ 2002-09-07 17:19 ` Benjamin Riefenstahl 2002-09-08 17:43 ` pd 3 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Riefenstahl @ 2002-09-07 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi Peter, Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> writes: > Well, I know I'm probably in a minority here, but I actually think > HTML e-mail is a pretty good idea. You can get much more readable, > and more *meaningful* content with HTML. Shouldn't that read "more meaningful form"? HTML does nothing about the content as far as I see. One could say that exactly because people should look at their content, they should not distract themself and their readers with extraneous form elements. In my experience HTML is very, very rarely an improvement in email (or Usenet) messages. so long, benny ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-09-07 17:19 ` Benjamin Riefenstahl @ 2002-09-08 17:43 ` pd 2002-09-10 12:36 ` Oliver Scholz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: pd @ 2002-09-08 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw) "Benjamin Riefenstahl" <Benjamin.Riefenstahl@epost.de> wrote in message news:m3lm6demzz.fsf@benny-ppc.benny.crocodial.de... > Hi Peter, > > > Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> writes: > > Well, I know I'm probably in a minority here, but I actually think > > HTML e-mail is a pretty good idea. You can get much more readable, > > and more *meaningful* content with HTML. > > Shouldn't that read "more meaningful form"? HTML does nothing about > the content as far as I see. > > One could say that exactly because people should look at their > content, they should not distract themself and their readers with > extraneous form elements. In my experience HTML is very, very rarely > an improvement in email (or Usenet) messages. I don't want to prolong this debate too much. However, I couldn't help but notice that your reply has quoted part of mine, and contains two blocks of text with a blank line between them. Is that form or content? Answer: it's both! The fact that text is divided into paragraphs, or that documents are divided into sections, possibly with headers in a different typeface, or that lists and nested lists can be structured by indentation, etc. are both form and content. These things can not be separated as easily as some people think. HTML can help to communicate these things more clearly than plain text. -pd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-09-08 17:43 ` pd @ 2002-09-10 12:36 ` Oliver Scholz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Oliver Scholz @ 2002-09-10 12:36 UTC (permalink / raw) "pd" <pd@world.std.com> writes: > "Benjamin Riefenstahl" <Benjamin.Riefenstahl@epost.de> wrote in message > news:m3lm6demzz.fsf@benny-ppc.benny.crocodial.de... >> Hi Peter, >> >> >> Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> writes: >> > Well, I know I'm probably in a minority here, but I actually think >> > HTML e-mail is a pretty good idea. You can get much more readable, >> > and more *meaningful* content with HTML. >> >> Shouldn't that read "more meaningful form"? HTML does nothing about >> the content as far as I see. >> >> One could say that exactly because people should look at their >> content, they should not distract themself and their readers with >> extraneous form elements. In my experience HTML is very, very rarely >> an improvement in email (or Usenet) messages. > > I don't want to prolong this debate too much. However, I couldn't help but > notice that your reply has quoted part of mine, and contains two blocks of > text with a blank line between them. Is that form or content? Answer: > it's both! The fact that text is divided into paragraphs, or that documents > are divided into sections, possibly with headers in a different typeface, or > that lists and nested lists can be structured by indentation, etc. are both > form and content. These things can not be separated as easily as some > people think. HTML can help to communicate these things more clearly than > plain text. [...] I think, HTML-mail is rather a social problem. ("social" includes the default behaviour of many MUAs here). To have a html-tag or two for bold or italic text now and then is something fairly innocent. And to have proper tables or visually distinguished header-lines could be a real benefit. Sometimes, when the information involved is very complex, even different font sizes could be a good thing. However, most HTML-mail I get is not that innocent. It takes usually about three times the space the same mail takes in plain text. And for what? For lots of unnecessary font- and size-specifications. I am not interested in what the user at the other end thinks which is the most readable font for her. And I am not interested in her favourite background-color. I do know myself what font and what background color are the best for my eyes. I hardly see any HTML-mail in which the HTML is anything else but cumbersome and annoying. It is possible to get much of the useful formatting with plain text-messages: There is a simple, widely used markup-language for *bold*, _underlined_ or /italic/ text. +---------------+---------------+---------------+ |For tables |we have |this sort of | +---------------+---------------+---------------+ |tables |with |ascii-graphics.| +---------------+---------------+---------------+ If I have to write a long text with headings and sub-headings I usually resort to different levels of indentation[1]. Gnus users can have images displayed inline in the message. With Gnus it is even possible to get a different font and fontification for code-snipplets in messages. And as soon as UTF-8 is more common, we get lots of graphics in mail. I admit that all this is only a workaround. I seem to recall that I saw an Elisp package somewhere that allows to send HTML-mail with Gnus using a simple Wiki-like markup-language. Something like this would be nice: If HTML were used only when meaningful, it could be a great thing. But since we won't change the major MUAs, we are right to frown upon HTML in mail and news. My personal experience is that I can not persuade my friends to use another (better) MUA, but that I can persuade/force them to turn HTML off. BTW: does actually anyone use text/enriched in mail or news? -- Oliver Footnotes: [1] And we have footnotes, too. -- 24 Fructidor an 210 de la Révolution Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Editing email replies 2002-08-31 23:18 ` Peter Davis 2002-09-01 2:02 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri @ 2002-09-01 5:17 ` Charles Muller [not found] ` <mailman.1030857423.3550.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> 2 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Charles Muller @ 2002-09-01 5:17 UTC (permalink / raw) Peter Davis wrote: > Seems likely that that's what it did. Still, I'd like *some* way to > edit such messages in emacs (with MH or gnus). I've actually had > people complain to me that when I reply to their messages, all the > formatting that they put in is lost. I wonder if you have tried the MEW ("Messaging in the Emacs World") package that's coming through with a lot of Linux distros? It has a really broad range of customization settings, and a help list where you get fast and useful answers. Chuck --------------------------- Charles Muller <acmuller@gol.com> Faculty of Humanities, Toyo Gakuen University Digital Dictionary of Buddhism and CJKV-English Dictionary [http://www.acmuller.net] Mobile Phone: 090-9310-1787 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.1030857423.3550.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>]
* Re: Editing email replies [not found] ` <mailman.1030857423.3550.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> @ 2002-09-05 1:45 ` pd 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: pd @ 2002-09-05 1:45 UTC (permalink / raw) "Charles Muller" <acmuller@gol.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1030857423.3550.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org... > Peter Davis wrote: > > > Seems likely that that's what it did. Still, I'd like *some* way to > > edit such messages in emacs (with MH or gnus). I've actually had > > people complain to me that when I reply to their messages, all the > > formatting that they put in is lost. > > I wonder if you have tried the MEW ("Messaging in the Emacs World") package > that's coming through with a lot of Linux distros? It has a really > broad range of customization settings, and a help list where you get > fast and useful answers. Thanks. I'll check it out. I'm in the Windows world, but perhaps it can be made to live there too. -pd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-09-10 12:36 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2002-08-30 3:15 Editing email replies pd 2002-08-30 14:54 ` Barry Margolin 2002-08-30 15:38 ` Peter Davis 2002-08-30 16:34 ` Barry Margolin 2002-08-30 15:51 ` Peter Davis 2002-08-31 16:21 ` Kai Großjohann 2002-08-31 23:18 ` Peter Davis 2002-09-01 2:02 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri 2002-09-01 2:58 ` those who know me have no need of my name 2002-09-02 16:05 ` Peter Davis 2002-09-02 21:59 ` those who know me have no need of my name 2002-09-02 23:07 ` Kevin A. Scaldeferri 2002-09-03 1:14 ` Sacha Chua 2002-09-07 17:19 ` Benjamin Riefenstahl 2002-09-08 17:43 ` pd 2002-09-10 12:36 ` Oliver Scholz 2002-09-01 5:17 ` Charles Muller [not found] ` <mailman.1030857423.3550.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> 2002-09-05 1:45 ` pd
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).