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

Re: [TCLUG:11699] Messages As Attachments [was Re: [TCLUG:11633]Ipaddress timouts]



On Thu, 30 Dec 1999, Thomas Veldhouse wrote:

> I think HTML email is a good idea too!  But most on the list would not
> appreciate it, right?  I use pine when telnetting, and that is a good
> reason NOT to use HTML - probably the primary reason.  Does this same
> rational apply to mutipart signed messages?  I don't see why not.
> 
> Tom Veldhouse
> veldy@visi.com
> 

But multipart signed messages are plain text and SHOULD be parsable by any
mail client, unlike HTML which (at least the HTML outlook and those type
of clients produce) really requires a graphical browser. And has anyone
considered killing this thread?!

-- 
Nate Carlson <carlson@real-time.com>    | Phone : (612)943-8700
http://www.real-time.com                | Fax   : (612)943-8500