On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 10:05:10AM -0500, Robert Nesius wrote: > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Florin Iucha <florin at iucha.net> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 09:54:11AM -0500, Justin Krejci wrote: > > > > > Using HTML > > email > > > > is a > > > > > lot easier for people to communicate than plain. > > > > > > > Proof by contradiction: > > > Let it be easier to communicate in plain text than HTML. > > > Then everyone would want to communicate in plain text at all times. > > > Not all books or emails or newspapers are written in plain text. > > > In fact most aren't. > > > Therefore plain text is not easier. > > > > And people wear make-up and spend hours dressing up and combing their > > hair because it is easier than throwing on a sack? > > That's a straw-man argument, and thus an invalid refutation. I give you that is more pleasurable to for an artsy person to communicate by HTML where they can richly convey many nuances using text style and seamless inclusions of images and sound afforded by the medium. But it takes more work - it is not easier. It is more pleasurable for me (and Yaron) to manage my own web and e-mail server, but is not _easier_. I was asking about effective uses of HTML in current business correspondence, as opposed to fanciful (ornate signatures notwithstanding). Cheers, florin -- Bruce Schneier expects the Spanish Inquisition. http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/163 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20100702/254a90b1/attachment.pgp