VOTE ...HTML or Plain Text???

I was surprised by the acceptance of an HTML post in another thread. I, for
one, could read the HTML fine. Others said the same thing.

Has the time come for HTML in the newsgroup(s)?

My (change is bad - we fear change) vote is no HTML ... for now.

I'm being fuddy-duddy with my reason: I get bombarded with "wow" media all
day. It's a nice change of pace to read the ol' newsgroups in a plain text
format.

I have no clue what technical problems HTML causes for some other newsgroup
participants.

Your vote on HTML.....?

--
Montblack

"Montblack" wrote in message
.. .
I was surprised by the acceptance of an HTML post in another thread. I,
for
one, could read the HTML fine. Others said the same thing.

Has the time come for HTML in the newsgroup(s)?

Boy, you're askin' for it.

I'll bite...

IMHO, nothing inherent wrong with HTML. However, it should be avoided in
almost every case, simply because of the lack of added value. Even in the
post that started your question, the information could have just as easily
been presented in plain text. The fact that it *wasn't* doesn't mean it
couldn't have been, nor that it shouldn't have been.

A couple of big reasons why not to use HTML unless it really adds something:
as someone else pointed out, for many people, it makes the post hard to
read. Believe it or not, not everyone uses Outlook Express or one of the
other HTML-aware newsreaders. It only SEEMS like they do. Another reason
is simple efficiency. Bandwidth should be conserved at all times, just as
all other resources should be conserved. When you need the extra bandwidth
to convey something that's otherwise impossible to convey, then by all
means, use HTML. But otherwise, use plain text.

I realize that in this day and age of the daily-driver 12 mpg SUV, lots of
people will disagree. They are the same people that think that as long as
someone else is wasting more than they are, they don't need to conserve.
Water, gas, electricity, paper, and yes, even bandwidth. Just because
someone else uses more than you do, that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to
minimize your own use, avoiding wasteful use of the resource.

Pete

Another reason to use plain text is the possibility of nefarious
java, asp, javascript and other types of HTML-embedded routines. We get
sufficient spam in the newsgroups and too many of them have
these little (and sometimes, not so little!) routines in them.

And they get really nasty at times.

blanche cohen wrote:

Another reason to use plain text is the possibility of nefarious
java, asp, javascript and other types of HTML-embedded routines.

While that might be a good reason to set things up so that nobody could
post HTML to the newsgroups, it is hardly a reason for a poster to refrain
from using it. No spammer is going to be able to sneak an embedded routine
into one of Montblack's posts, and having all the usual posters refrain
from using HTML will not stop the spammer or vandal who wants to post
such a routine.

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel

In a previous article, "G.R. Patterson III" said:
blanche cohen wrote:

Another reason to use plain text is the possibility of nefarious
java, asp, javascript and other types of HTML-embedded routines.

While that might be a good reason to set things up so that nobody could
post HTML to the newsgroups, it is hardly a reason for a poster to refrain
from using it. No spammer is going to be able to sneak an embedded routine

And it's an EXTREMELY good reason for a person to not use an HTML-aware
newsreader. And since most people post because they want other people to
read it, and smart people are reading with plain text newsreaders, it
would make sense to post in plain text.


--
Paul Tomblin , not speaking for anybody
And on the seventh day, He exited from append mode.

Paul Tomblin wrote:

And it's an EXTREMELY good reason for a person to not use an HTML-aware
newsreader.

Or perhaps an HTML aware reader that doesn't respond to ActiveX, Java or
scripting but still displays tables that are easy to read.

A (rhetorical) poll: how many users know whether or not their
newsreader is open to ActiveX, Java or scripting at this instant?

Plain text if fine. HTML doesn't add anything to a discussion.

-- Jay


__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino/ ! ! !

Checkout http://www.oc-adolfos.com/
for the best Italian food in Ocean City, MD and...
Checkout http://www.brolow.com/ for authentic Blues music on Delmarva

In a previous article, "Montblack" said:
Has the time come for HTML in the newsgroup(s)?

No. Newsgroups are about information, not about fancy formatting.


--
Paul Tomblin, PP-ASEL _|_ Rochester Flying Club web page:
____/___\____ http://www.rochesterflyingclub.com/
___________[o0o]___________

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "Montblack"
said:
Has the time come for HTML in the newsgroup(s)?

No. Newsgroups are about information, not about fancy formatting.



True, except that tabular information such as in the message this thread was
triggered by is more clearly communicated in a true table rather than a
"psuedo-table" created with space or tab characters that get rearranged by
the news reader. If "fancy formatting" enhances the information transfer
then by all means go for it. For example there was is a recent thread on
the pin-outs of an Isocom intercom. Instead of a manually typed text list
of the pin assignments, wouldn't an image of the schematic embedded in an
HTML message communicate more information more clearly and with less chance
of error? In a case like that it seems to me that "fancy formatting" gives
rise to more information.

In a previous article, "Steve House" said:
the pin-outs of an Isocom intercom. Instead of a manually typed text list
of the pin assignments, wouldn't an image of the schematic embedded in an
HTML message communicate more information more clearly and with less chance
of error? In a case like that it seems to me that "fancy formatting" gives
rise to more information.

And an even better solution would be to stick it on a web site somewhere
and post a link to it. That way the 5 or 6 people who are interested can
see it the way you intended it, and the tens of thousands of news servers
out there don't have to cart around this binary that so few people want to
see.


--
Paul Tomblin , not speaking for anybody
"Very sad life. Probably have very sad death. But at least there is
symmetry. Go, Go, Zathrus take care."