[AT] HTML and Attachments

[Robert Brooks]

Dean;


At 12:25 PM 2/13/04 -0800, Dean VP wrote:
>Bob:
>
>Gee Whiz, in 6 or 7 years on this list I send my first and only lousy
>cartoon to test the new software capability/limits and now I'm a habitual
>criminal. :-)  Give me a break!  :-) When did the "ONE-STRIKE" law get
>passed?


Just don't make a habit of it.  ;)

We don't keep track, as long as you promise not to attach your picture to 
every email.


>However due to my crime, a potential problem got noticed, addressed and
>solved in 24 hours. I consider that a good crime, if there is such a thing.
>Maybe that is now known as civil disobedience! :-)

Hey if you can't be teased by 100 of your close friends who can you be 
teased by?

Just remember that civil disobedience is guaranteed under the constitution.

Bob





>Dean A. Van Peursem
>Snohomish, WA 98290
>
>CRS = Having a Photographic Memory but a shortage of unused film.
>
>www.deerelegacy.com
>
>http://members.cox.net/classicweb/email.htm
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
>[mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Robert Brooks
>Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 11:58 AM
>To: Antique tractor email discussion group
>Subject: Re: [AT] HTML and Attachments
>
>Spencer;
>
>I think your compromise is a good one.  It should let everybody
>participate, and we can't ask Dean to give up his cartoon's.
>
>Bob
>
>
>At 09:07 AM 2/13/04 -0500, Spencer Yost wrote:
> >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
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >AT mailing list
> >AT at lists.antique-tractor.com
> >http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
>Bob Brooks
>
>rbrooks at hvc.rr.com
>
>"It takes courage to grow up and turn out to be who you really are."
>- ee cummings
>
>_______________________________________________
>AT mailing list
>AT at lists.antique-tractor.com
>http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>AT mailing list
>AT at lists.antique-tractor.com
>http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at

Bob Brooks

rbrooks at hvc.rr.com

"It takes courage to grow up and turn out to be who you really are."
- ee cummings