HTML and Text versions of Email

[hoihtah]

can someone please explain to me what happens when emails are sent in html vs. text

i know at least with netscape messenger, there's an option of sending in both types... in case the client's email app doesn't support html.

how does that process work exactly? does it send two messages?

i first thought, perhaps, it send html and if it bounces back, it'll know to send the text version.
but when i tested it, i realized that it doesn't bounce.
it just reads the html codes... (jibberish to many)

if someone can explain this to me... i'd greatly appreciate it.

thanx in advance.

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: hoihtah
can someone please explain to me what happens when emails are sent in html vs. text

i know at least with netscape messenger, there's an option of sending in both types... in case the client's email app doesn't support html.

how does that process work exactly? does it send two messages?

i first thought, perhaps, it send html and if it bounces back, it'll know to send the text version.
but when i tested it, i realized that it doesn't bounce.
it just reads the html codes... (jibberish to many)

if someone can explain this to me... i'd greatly appreciate it.

thanx in advance.

HTML sux for emails, don't use it.

 

[hoihtah]

thanx... ndee.

why do you find html to suck?

 

[ndee]

1. Useless bandwith wasting.
2. Some people don't have HTML-enabled mail readers.
3. Security hole in some Outlook Versions.
4. It sux.

 

[ggavinmoss]

Originally posted by: ndee
1. Useless bandwith wasting.
2. Some people don't have HTML-enabled mail readers.
3. Security hole in some Outlook Versions.
4. It sux.

Wow. Definitely the whole story.

Choose your audience when using it (read: make sure people you send to can recieve HTML e-mail). I think you can specify in your Outlook address book to only send text to certain recipients. That's useful.

If, for example, you have a business use for sending a properly formatted e-mail HTML is often the way to go. Sure you could achieve the same with attachments, but it's more of a hassle if the document doesn't already exist.

As for security holes -- patch them. Stay vigilent with your virus scanner and use caution opening ANY e-mail.

-geoff

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: ggavinmoss

Originally posted by: ndee
1. Useless bandwith wasting.
2. Some people don't have HTML-enabled mail readers.
3. Security hole in some Outlook Versions.
4. It sux.

Wow. Definitely the whole story.

Choose your audience when using it (read: make sure people you send to can recieve HTML e-mail). I think you can specify in your Outlook address book to only send text to certain recipients. That's useful.

If, for example, you have a business use for sending a properly formatted e-mail HTML is often the way to go. Sure you could achieve the same with attachments, but it's more of a hassle if the document doesn't already exist.

As for security holes -- patch them. Stay vigilent with your virus scanner and use caution opening ANY e-mail.

-geoff

It's something else for business but normal manager-business-e-commerce stuff usually sux too, like in our company, 14-line-footer and stuff 😉

 

[hoihtah]

well let's see...

1. Useless bandwith wasting.
well... if you think of gopher as text version of web-browser...
people are wasting bandwidth by using html with your logic

2. Some people don't have HTML-enabled mail readers.
true, but the percentage of text only users are very minute. In general marketing, target text users are less than 10%.
and it's for that 10%, that i asked my question.

3. Security hole in some Outlook Versions.
first, outlook is not the only email application the people use... while admittedly it is one of the largest.
secondly... it's a matter of patching holes... winxp along with IE, has more holes that you can imagine...
but that's not stopping billions from using it.

of couse there's a fast growing fan club of mozilla... but that argument in itself answers your #3.

4. It sux.
well... that brings us back to my first question...

"why do you find html to suck?"

 

[hoihtah]

damm... i hate when i get side-tracked like that.

🙂

anyone know the anatomical difference between html emails and text emails?
and how does email app know to send the right one for the client?

 

[dullard]

I use telnet to read all my emails. I check it from dozens of different locations and I find it just so much easier than trying to remember to tell each computer (every single time) not to delete the email from the server when I check it.

Basically I receive 4 types of emails:
1) Text only - these are great and I really hope everyone just sends these.
2) HTML only - I see gibberish and have no chance of reading these. Since all of them are spam, I see the gibberish and delete it immediately.
3) Text appears but there is a little note that an unsupported format was sent. It then gives me the option to download it to my computer where I can read it using something else. However this is unnecessary since the text that was sent says the same thing.
4) No text appears at all but I have that same note about unsupported format. I download it and open it with another program.

I cannot answer your question as to which I will recieve. However it is either #3 or #4.

 

[ggavinmoss]

Originally posted by: hoihtah
damm... i hate when i get side-tracked like that.

🙂

anyone know the anatomical difference between html emails and text emails?
and how does email app know to send the right one for the client?

What do you mean the right one? I think it sends whatever you tell it to send. HTML is just text with more text afterall... Clarify your question.

-geoff

 

[joohang]

IIRC, HTML emails got a plain text section as well as the HTML section.

Save one of your emails in Outlook and check the source.

 

[AnthraX101]

It uses specialy formated headers to identify that it is a MIME-mixed content email. It then sends both types, with a delimiter to note where the "pure text" copy ends, and the HTML formated one begins.

People whose EMail readers support HTML will hit that header, and ignore everything above it, and just format the stuff below it acording to its instructions.

People whose EMail readers don't, will see the text, and when the whole EMail is done, you hit those headers in plain text, and begin to see code. You know it's time to stop (unless looking for something hidden in the code, like a links URL)

Please use text only 🙂 It is much nicer, and has more compatibility. If I see a message only in HTML, it is automaticaly deleted as spam, rather then me trying to read it. So if you realy NEED to use it, use a mixed content type! That way you get the best of both worlds.

Armani

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: hoihtah
well let's see...

1. Useless bandwith wasting.
well... if you think of gopher as text version of web-browser...
people are wasting bandwidth by using html with your logic

It has it's purpose for Webpages but not for Emails, but that's just my opinion.


2. Some people don't have HTML-enabled mail readers.
true, but the percentage of text only users are very minute. In general marketing, target text users are less than 10%.
and it's for that 10%, that i asked my question.

For that 90% you mean? 😉


3. Security hole in some Outlook Versions.
first, outlook is not the only email application the people use... while admittedly it is one of the largest.
secondly... it's a matter of patching holes... winxp along with IE, has more holes that you can imagine...
but that's not stopping billions from using it.

of couse there's a fast growing fan club of mozilla... but that argument in itself answers your #3.

OK, every Joe Sixpack who has XP installed and uses Outlook Express or just the MS Office Suite, I'm nearly 100% sure that they don't patch their systems regularly. They install it once, and don't mind afterwords.


4. It sux.
well... that brings us back to my first question...

"why do you find html to suck?"

1. Useless bandwith wasting.
2. Some people don't have HTML-enabled mail readers.
3. Security hole in some Outlook Versions.
4. It sux.

😀