From: Benjamin Geer <ben(_at_)socialtools(_dot_)net>
If HTML formating is so valuable, valued and nearly universal used,
why haven't we seen much of it in this mailing list?
Because in technical circles (and some academic ones), HTML email is
prohibited by cultural tradition -- the same tradition that says quoting in
replies should be done in the style I'm using here.
That implies that HTML should be less common here, but not as absent
as it has been. We've had contributions from people who don't seem well
versed on such conventions, including top-posting and full-quoting.
Elsewhere, another
culture reigns, in which HTML is the norm, and quoting is done by inserting
the new text above the quoted (and usually indented) message (which is not
trimmed, so that the entire thread is sent with each reply). Efforts to
impose cultural change are notoriously fraught.
Yes, but we've seen top-posting and full-quoting in this list, but
practically no HTML. It's possible that those running Mailman for
this list have set filters against HTML, but I doubt it.
Again, I'm not saying that HTML mail is other than useful and valuable
or that the Internet doesn't carry 10,000,000's of real, intentionally
formatted HTML mail every day. I am saying that the claims that users
care about HTML in more than a few percent of their messages are false.
You've said you have access to lots of mailing lists where HTML mail
is the norm. Would it be too hard to look at the next 50 representative
messages? (e.g. not a mailing list devoted to tech. writers discussing
how to do 2-column facing pages with odd/even headers and footers,
auto-numbered footnotes, and flowed text around figures).
Vernon Schryver vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg