Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: HTML - was RE: Flashed RB still having charging issues..
Re: HTML - was RE: Flashed RB still having charging issues..
From: Chris Hoekstra <chris_hoekstra_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:26:21 -0500
Whew, so you mean I don't have to go in and change several settings in
my mail client on the rare occasions I send mail to the list and then
set those settings back to catch back up with the rest of the world?
Fred Maxwell wrote:
> Coming to Paul's defense here, I can easily understand how an HTML message
> could slip through. Neither at home nor at work do I have my e-mail client
> optimized for posting on the Rockbox mailing list. At work, for instance,
> we regularly send and receive HTML e-mail, using text coloring, boldface,
> underlining, and italics to emphasize text. While I try to remember to
> revert to plain text mode for posting on this list, I'm certain that I will,
> occasionally forget to do so.
> Frankly, HTML has a lot of advantages, such as the ones mentioned above. I
> know that people who subscribe to the digest have problems with it, but
> that's a complaint that should be brought up with the folks running the
> mailing list, not those who post on it.
> There is a perl script called Stripmime.pl designed for use with mailing
> list systems. It strips out the HTML and MIME, leaving the messages as
> plain text. That prevents HTML formatting from messing up digests, or
> attachments from being sent to the list at all. It can be set to operate on
> all e-mail or just the digest. I recommend looking into that rather than
> chastising individual members each time that they forget to manually change
> the outgoing message to plain text.
> Fred Maxwell
> Johan Vromans wrote:
>>Paul van der Heu <pvdh_at_xs4all.nl> writes:
>>><div><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=3> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 10:58:15 -0400,
>>>Fred Maxwell wrote:</FONT></div>
>>Didn't we agree to not post HTML messages?
Received on 2003-10-21