> --]To solve web bugs, the mail reader/ html renderer should refuse to load
> --]content not within the transmitted message.
> --]
>
>
> Ive heard of this security "feature" Reading bugtraq for any more than 5
> mins lets you realize there is no santa claus.
Sorry, are you implying that there exist bugtraq entries related to this trivial
feature? I highly doubt it.
The first standard reason for ascii email is that least common denominators maximize
network effects. If HTML is as good a least common denominator as ascii, and it
seems to be about 99% as good, then the case against HTML is mainly moot. *
The second standard reason for ascii email is a belief that HTML, like other
presentation formats, is about prettiness. Answer: no. Presentation is about
communication. Tools like typography help to express more data, more easily, with
finer shades of meaning and fewer misunderstandings.
Ok you luddites, I'm going up to wine country for the rest of the day. Anybody want
to join me in a round of "look at all my trials and tribulations/sinking in a gentle
pool of wine/don't deceive me now I can see the answer/til this evening is this
morning life is fine"?
- Lucas
*except for Kragen, who reads mail with less. That is the kind of madness to which I
cannot cower. And anyhow Kragen would clearly enjoy the challege of something like
piping less through awk to hack an html renderer at the shell level.
> --]To solve web bugs, the mail reader/ html renderer should refuse to load
> --]content not within the transmitted message.
> --]
>
>
> Ive heard of this security "feature" Reading bugtraq for any more than 5
> mins lets you realize there is no santa claus.
>
> Ascii, first last and always.
>
>
>
>
> /"\ [---=== WSMF ----http://wsmf.doesntexist.com===---]
> \ /
> X ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> / \ Against HTML Mail
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 27 2001 - 23:18:57 PDT