TCLUG Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [TCLUG:807] A Mail List Suggestion



> 
> Just my two-cents...
> 
> I think that HTML mail is a good and more-or-less effective way to provide
> richness to what has traditionally been plain text. When I was a
> technology/communication major in college, I studied the communication
> capabilities of differing media (phone, face-to-face, e-mail, etc), and the
> major gripe about e-mail was that it wasn't expressive enough. The smiley
> faces have helped, but still aren't enough. We get over 80% of meaning in
> face-to-face conversation by expressions, gestures, and tone of voice. Text
> isn't capable of this, but with some enhancements, it could do better.

I think this line of reasoning is glossing over a crucial distinction:
the richness provided by gestures and tone of voice are not something
the sender does at a concious level (at least not typically) -- that is
why they help us assess the emotional tone of the message.  HTML does
not have this advantage over plain text: the message received is
totally of the sender's concious creation.  It simply does not solve
this problem.

To communicate effectively in a media where emotional cues are
necessarily circumscribed is a skill that has to be learned, and I
believe that the "richness" presented by HTML will only make it more
difficult for people to learn this skill, because they will be
distracted from the real content of what they are trying to say by
the opportunity to play with non-content-adding stylistic contrivances.
  
> Unfortunately, the standard hasn't caught on yet. Worse, some e-mail clients
> didn't also send the text/plain MIME type with the text/HTML file. Outlook
> Express, if I'm correct, may have been one of them.

Call me a Luddite, but I'm glad HTML has not become the standard for
e-mail.  I think that, if you *are* going to send HTML, though, you
should (1) only send to people who have designated themselves HTML-
friendly, and then (2) *not* send a plain text attachment along with
your HTML one.

The reason for this is bandwith.  Consider the poor soul POPping down
your message over a 33.6 (or slower) connection!  If HTML is essential
to your message, fine ... send HTML only.  If not, sent plain text
only.
 
> On the other hand, anyone who complains about their *client* getting
> gibberish when both MIME types are in the message is responsible for their
> own problem. I have NO PROBLEM with shell-based clients (I often use Pine
> myself), but even Pine has been able to distinguish between the two MIME
> types for over a year, displaying the text/plain type and including the
> other as an attachment. Version 4.0 supposedly even adds "support" for the
> text/HTML type (haven't played with it myself, however ;-) ).

For seeing gibberish on their screen, I'll agree with you.  For having
to download gibberish over a slow modem line, no, that's the sender's
responsiblity.
 
> I also agree that flaming people and telling them that their attempt to
> communicate resulted in "crap" won't help our cause.

While impoliteness may be frowned upon, the poster who called HTML
"crap" did succeed in succinctly expressing an emotional sentiment
using good old plain ASCII text.  There's a line to be walked here:
while being rude is ... well, rude ... it also helped to communicate
the fact that this is an emotional issue for the sender -- and probably
inspired more than one of our list readers to double check their
message format setting more effectively than a dry, technical comment
would.

> Again, just my two-cents. Intellient criticism is welcomed.
> 
> Neal

I realize that this commentary is off-topic for this list, and I hope
that fellow subscribers don't find me too out-of-line.  But since one
poster agreed with the sentiment that the extra content of HTML mail
provides for better communication, I thought I'd present an opposing
point of view ... especially since traffic on tclug-list is still
pretty light.

Forrest
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Nolte [mailto:bob.nolte@pc4u.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 1998 8:01 AM
> To: TCLUG
> Subject: [TCLUG:807] A Mail List Suggestion
> 
> 
> We should have a notice on the "Mailing List" web page regarding the
> annoyance to users re HTML mail.
> 
> Flaming people about their mail programs won't do a lot for promoting Linux.
> This message was sent via Outlook Express with HTML shut off. If there's
> still something wrong with the format, someone should tell me what it is.
> 
> I recently shut off HTML on a client's Eudora Pro computer because it would
> not send mail to a Sharp Mobilon hand-held PC for the same reason. It's a
> heck of a lot more trouble to find the setting in Eudora.
> 
> HTML mail is not just a Pine problem, although sooner or later, a modern day
> replacement for Pine needs to be found,-one which uses the word delete
> instead of expunge <g>.
> 
> Bob Nolte
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tclug-list-unsubscribe@listserv.real-time.com
> For additional commands, e-mail: tclug-list-help@listserv.real-time.com
> Try our website: http://tclug.real-time.com
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tclug-list-unsubscribe@listserv.real-time.com
> For additional commands, e-mail: tclug-list-help@listserv.real-time.com
> Try our website: http://tclug.real-time.com
> 


-- 
| Forrest Cahoon      | forrest@pconline.com |------------------------------|
| 850 21st Ave SE     |----------------------| Only unbalanced people       |
| Mpls MN  55414-2514 |                      |        can tip the scales... |