Re: HTML: woes

Dwayne (
Fri, 13 Mar 1998 21:06:09 +1100

Erik Moeller wrote:

> >> There's still a difference in using documented standards and placing
> >> invisible remote images creating a request on a server anywhere and
> thereby
> >> logging the user's mail receipt directly without his/her knowledge.
> >So in your example above, the user is aware that you are being informed
> >when they read your mail?
> No, unless he checks the HTML code in-depth. And draws the right
> conclusions. Even "illustrative" images would be enough, but that's the
> obvious way of doing it. Invisible GIF images are worse.

But I thought that you were trying to say that you don't need the "return
receipt" or whatever it is bit set in mail because you have HTML-based tools
which can do the job? I'm all confused now.

> Fuck it, HTML in e-mail is a no-no.

Oh, well, I guess we're on the same side after all.

> >> >I'd thought that the umlauts in german can be swapped for a following
> >> >"e"??
> >>
> >> Exactly, I'd just like this to be the standard. When I write an article
> >> and send it via mail, I have to use either HTML or zipped 8-bit ASCII
> because
> >> otherwise the recipient would have to re-convert all the umlauts (cannot
> >> be done automatically) in order to publish it.
> >
> >When you write to someone who doesn't speak german, only english, you write
> >in english, right?
> Right, but I don't understand your point.

My point is that you convert your thoughts into an appropriate format. I was
taught when I was learning german that if you can't use umlauts it is perfectly
acceptable to use a following 'e', in other words you convert what you *want* to
say into what you are *able* to say. There are workarounds for problems which
allow people to still read your mail. The workaround in this instance is ASCII
as opposed to HTML.