[Mailman-Users] RFC for List Message Header Fields

Christopher Petrilli petrilli at amber.org
Wed Mar 24 21:33:21 CET 1999

On Wed, Mar 24, 1999 at 08:11:27PM -0000, bruce at perens.com wrote:
> From: Darren Henderson <darren at jasper.somtel.com>
> > Email is not the web the web is not email.
> Mail is MIME is the web.

Well, after a fashion :-)  MIME determined the data type, but I wouldn't
argue similarities past that.

> We are making a mistake by not making more use of MIME. People slap my hand
> for sending HTML-ized mail. I guess there is someone out there still paying
> for net service by the KB, but I wish that would be over.

Hardly, but it's mostly noise, rarely adds value, AND many people read
mail in clients that don't necessarily handle HTML elegantly.  For
example, Mutt (which I use) has to spawn lynx to view it... oh now
there's a useful thing so some knucklehead can use a BLINK tag on his

Even when I used something that did handle HTML correctly, I never got
an HTML message that had any value added by the formatting, mostly it
just made it more difficult to read and even harder to cut and past into
another document, if it was some suggestion.

I have no problem with heavier use of MIME multi-part message structurs
where they make sense... but HTML still isn't that wide-spread in mail

ANYWAY, wasn't 'enriched-text' written JUST for this occasion? Or did I
miss that whole thing entirely? :-)

| Christopher Petrilli                      ``Television is bubble-gum for
| petrilli at amber.org                          the mind.''-Frank Lloyd Wright

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list