Message-Id:	<199811032249.WAA19428@relay.clara.net>
From:	"Arthur" <arfa AT clara DOT net>
To:	<djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	RE: Lewt's vote! was Re: Ban HTML postings?
Date:	Tue, 3 Nov 1998 22:44:56 -0000
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance:	Normal
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.GSO.3.96.981103164409.22526C-100000@eduserv2.rug.ac.be>
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> My vote is as follows:
>
> I vote yes on bamming the html, because it's very annoying, I use PINE and
> it chokes on those messages.

I agree, but only because it annoys other people and takes ages to format
back to plain text format (I use Outlook 98).

> I vote no on banning multipart because SOMETIMES sending a small zip file
> can be useful, like when sending zipped sources for a finished small djgpp
> utility.

Yes. Multipart messages have been supported by most mail programs since the
early 90s, so I would keep them in. I'm not sure if free mail servers can
handle them, but it does make life easier for the rest of us :-)

BTW, which is the most supported format - MIME or UUencode? I've always
thought UUencode was the best supported, but I'd like to hear confirmation
of this.

James Arthur
jaa AT arfa DOT clara DOT net
ICQ#15054819

- Raw text -