On Sun, 2004-03-07 at 07:19, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote: > is either blind, Rodolfo I will admit I have lifted what I quote right out of the context you used it in, but the thought struck me that those who have to rely on a screen to speech converter would find HTML messages a little hard to follow.
Indeed they might. If so, people sending mail directly to that person should definitely exercise some sensitivity. And of course, the text-to-speech program should learn to interpret HTML so as to correctly read the content and not the markup.
I agree there are places for HTML, on a mail list, especially one with a large amount of traffic is maybe not the place.
A mailing list is definitely not the place for HTML mail. However, on the flip side of the coin I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation from even the most rabid fanatic on why I should stop using HTML for better presentation when sending email on a corporate Gigabit LAN where all clients are Evolution on Fedora.
OF COURSE there are many situations (many many many...) where HTML mail is inappropriate, rude, or even dangerous. There are also other situations where it is the most logical choice, the lowest-cost choice, and the one that people already understand. I don't want to start hearing comments about people (Winders drones) not using Linux "because they can't use pretty stuff in their email," OK?
-- Rodolfo J. Paiz rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.simpaticus.com
