[AT] HTML and Attachments

[Spencer Yost]

I have heard what Cecil has had to say and I know from experience that it may be difficult to enforce no attachments because many users have no control,  or have the experience and training to control, how attachments and message formatting is done.   

Here is the only compromise that may be acceptable:  Set the software to convert HTML to text but allow small attachments - say about 10K total message size.   That way email packages that send plain text but automatically send an HTML version without permission or control of the user(some old versions of Outlook did this) aren't left in the dark.  I also understand some web based email packages don't order the "parts" of the message correctly which may force the software to reject the message because the attachments come before the HTML message.  Since I scan all mail for viruses before they get to the list and very few viruses (probably none of them from the last 5 years) are smaller than 10K even if they get through my scanner the size limitation will effectively kill them.   The risk is there but very, very small.

This compromise does these things:

Doesn't unduly limit participation
Chops the tail of dragons and eliminates "bloaty" messages.
Allows for small, cute cartoons from Dean (-;
Doesn't significantly increase risk of viruses.
Low bandwidth users are not unduly inconvenienced.


What does everyone think of this compromise?  Stick with no attachments/HTML or try the compromise?


Spencer