no HTML replies
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tuxchick Jan 06, 2008 10:57 AM EDT |
This is a weird deal. I never use HTML messages and I cuss people who do, because it's nearly always gratuitous. But it's true- not only is it impossible to do HTML replies to HTML messages, you have to display the original message in HTML or it won't even make a correct text reply. If you don't have the original message displayed in HTML before hitting 'reply', any parts of it included in the reply will be quoted and in raw HTML. I agree that HTML email is a big fat pain and a security risk. But people want to use fancy formatting and colors- seems to me what we need is a safe, standard email format that allows this, without incorporating the perils of HTML. |
| Richard Jan 06, 2008 5:06 PM EDT |
I use, used, and still use kmail.
I have tried most of the others more than once,
but, IMO, kmail is the best email client in Linux. Maybe Windows refugees will just use Evolution, which was created as an Outlook for new Linux users. |
| ComputerBob Jan 06, 2008 6:25 PM EDT |
I have no doubt that KMail is the best email client for many Linux users. As I stated in my article, KMail would probably be the best email client for me, too, if its developers hadn't apparently intentionally crippled its HTML features. There's no reason why they couldn't fix those HTML features, and then KMail would be the best email client for you AND for me. Regarding Evolution -- as I said in my article, I haven't tried it because I've read many users' comments that describe it as being slow and bloated. And tonight, I received an email message from a reader, saying that Evolution has its own HTML problems that make it just as unsuitable as KMail -- and complaints about thos problems typically receive the same lack of respect that complaints about KMail receive. I think it would be a mistake to characterize these issues as being problems only for Windows refugees. While I fully understand that some Linux users' email needs are completely met by command-line-driven, text-only email clients, I'm asking KMail's developers to acknowledge that there are plenty of Linux veterans who do business through email, and a growing number of them them require their email client to fully support HTML features -- not to create the bloated, annoying email messages that WE ALL DESPISE, but for real business needs that can't be met by text-only email clients. ;) |
| dinotrac Jan 06, 2008 6:34 PM EDT |
>I'm asking KMail's developers to acknowledge that there are plenty of Linux veterans who do business through email, and a growing number of them them require their email client to fully support HTML features I'm sorry, Bob, but some kid with a computer science degree must know your business and your needs better than you do. This is one place where proprietary software actually does have an advantage: money as incentive to do things that people wouldn't otherwise do. I would rather have a true labor of love than a mercenary product that did the same thing, but I would rather have a mercenary product that meets my needs than a labor of love that fits what somebody else (incorrectly) thinks I should need. |
| tuxchick Jan 06, 2008 6:44 PM EDT |
I love KMail and wouldn't trade it for anything. Well, except maybe truckloads of cash, were someone crazy enough to offer. But this business with no HTML replies is silly. It doesn't make sense- sure, a lot of folks hate HTML email for its bloat, the way Microsoft's HTML never quite works correctly for anyone else, and its security problems. But KMail supports HTML in every other way, so why not this? Like weird, mon. |
| ComputerBob Jan 06, 2008 6:51 PM EDT |
dinotrac,
I guess that's what I get for taking only two computer science courses throughout my entire undergraduate, Masters and Doctoral programs! lol I know exactly what you're saying about labor-of-love vs. mercenary software. I'm an idealist -- my first, second, third and fourth choices are always to use the best open source solution I can find. But I'm also a realist -- when push comes to shove, if the open source solution doesn't work for me, then I'm going to hold my nose and use whatever I have to use to get the job done. ;) |
| rijelkentaurus Jan 06, 2008 6:53 PM EDT |
Quoting: which was created as an Outlook for new Linux users. Quoting: many users' comments that describe it as being slow and bloated. Yup. |
| ComputerBob Jan 06, 2008 6:58 PM EDT |
rijelkentaurus, LOL. That's got to be the shortest reply to anything I've ever read that actually made me laugh out loud. Good one! |
| krisum Jan 06, 2008 9:39 PM EDT |
@ComputerBob and @dino
Quoting: if its developers hadn't apparently intentionally crippled its HTML features. Quoting: but I would rather have a mercenary product that meets my needs than a labor of love that fits what somebody else (incorrectly) thinks I should need. To be fair, one of the kmail developers (Ingo) has replied in the bug report ( http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86423#c19 ) that the actual reason is a combination of technical and organizational reasons though it may be argued that developers could have given it a higher priority. But saying that developers have intentionally crippled it or implying that they think the feature should not be provided would be incorrect. I would rather believe Ingo, since for a long time kmail had no HTML composition feature either and was added as a quick-fix due to several user requests. |
| hkwint Jan 07, 2008 1:51 AM EDT |
Bob: You probably should register at KDE and vote for the bug; http://bugs.kde.org/votes.cgi?action=show_user&bug_id=86423 If enough people vote for it (and there are more people for which this issue is a blocker to use KMail), they will probably spend more resources on it, which they have to take away elsewhere I'm afraid. |
| ComputerBob Jan 07, 2008 4:10 AM EDT |
krisum: Thanks for your thoughtful response. When I was really working hard to try to get KMail to work as my email client, and discovering what later turned out to be the basis for my article. I saw that reasoning re: technical and organizational reasons for KMail to not have fully functioning HTML features. And I really wanted to think that those were the real reasons behind KMail's current state. But I believe that people find the time to do what they really want to do. The complaints about KMail have piled up in several places for many years, and the negative, defensive, patronizing and insulting responses to those complaints made it pretty clear to me that that KMail's "crippled" nature was by choice, and continue to be by choice. I haven't seen any significant evidence at all to indicate that the the KDE developers have any plans, or even interest, in bringing KMail's HTML features into line with what other major email clients have provided for at least the past decade. In fact, I've seen a lot of evidence to the contrary. So it appears to me that the "technical and organizational reasons" to which you refer do indeed help KMail's developers justify their decisions to not "fix" KMail, but since every other major email client that chooses to, seems to have found a way to provide fully functioning HTML features, while KMail still doesn't have them after all the complaints and all these years, the KDE developers "reasons" look suspiciously like excuses. And sadly, most users aren't going to bother doing all the searching and research that you and I have done on this topic, to try to figure out and "understand why" KMail doesn't have the HTML features that they have come to rely on and expect. They don't care WHY doesn't allow them to do what they need it to do. So no amount of "organizational and technical reasons" are going to make them say, "Oh, now I understand -- I guess I'll just stop using HTML in my email messages so that I can use KMail." No, they'll simply do what thousands before them have done -- go looking for an email client that does meet their needs. Which I think is very unfortunate, because KMail is a KDE "flagship" product, and as such, it has a much-coveted opportunity to be a "shining jewel" of LInux -- instead of a black eye. |
| ComputerBob Jan 07, 2008 4:18 AM EDT |
hkwint: Done! Thanks for the link to the relevant bug report! And I'm going to add that link to the end of my article, too. ;) |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 07, 2008 4:29 AM EDT |
Quoting:it has a much-coveted opportunity to be a "shining jewel" of LInux -- instead of a black eye. OOo is also often touted as "shining jewel". Doesn't say much, really. The only reason I bother opening OOo Calc is because Gnumeric doesn't have pivot-tables/data-pilots. Yet... Firefox? Just look to the xsl stylesheet issue with RSS feeds for your cup-of-black-eye. Thunderbird? It still has problems replying to HTML e-mail generated by Word. Every application has bugs. Just because it's FOSS doesn't make that untrue. |
| ComputerBob Jan 07, 2008 4:49 AM EDT |
Sander: You're free to disagree, but I feel that an application that is **the** email application of the entire KDE environment should reflect KDE's technical and user-interface excellence as well as an ongoing commitment to meet email users' evolving needs -- instead of a few individuals' antiquated anti-HTML zealotry. If the KDE developers were to announce, "We're working on it -- we're finally going to fix KMail's HTML features," I would be happy to be one of their biggest cheerleaders, instead of one of their biggest critics. ;) |
| krisum Jan 07, 2008 7:20 AM EDT |
ComputerBob, It may be true that HTML composition issues are not in the priority list of the developers, but a related reason may be that it is a *lot* of work and one that no developer is sufficiently interested since it is not of use to the *developers*. Hence Ingo suggests the alternative of sponsoring the same (many notable features like those from project Aegypten have been such, as Ingo points out). Quoting: The complaints about KMail have piled up in several places for many years, and the negative, defensive, patronizing and insulting responses to those complaints made it pretty clear to me that that KMail's "crippled" nature was by choice, and continue to be by choice. There are some users who do behave in such a manner but I have not seen such responses from any of the developers -- please correct me if you have noticed otherwise. Quoting: And sadly, most users aren't going to bother doing all the searching and research that you and I have done on this topic, to try to figure out and "understand why" KMail doesn't have the HTML features that they have come to rely on and expect. They don't care WHY doesn't allow them to do what they need it to do. So no amount of "organizational and technical reasons" are going to make them say, "Oh, now I understand -- I guess I'll just stop using HTML in my email messages so that I can use KMail." No, they'll simply do what thousands before them have done -- go looking for an email client that does meet their needs. Unfortunately not many developers would be troubled even if this were to be true. Most of the features in such free software are usually a result of the interest of the developers rather than those of the users. The point is that there is no reason to believe this situation to be an intentional behavior on the part of developers wanting to thrust their opinion on the users. Rather it may just be that those features are not useful to the developers and consequently their lack of interest. |
| tuxchick Jan 07, 2008 7:36 AM EDT |
Quoting: Most of the features in such free software are usually a result of the interest of the developers rather than those of the users. Ya know, this is one of those popular myths that needs to have a stake put through its heart. If that is really the attitude of software developers, then they need to change professions. When a developer writes something for personal use and not for public distribution, meh, who cares. But when they're working on a popular project like KDE, then they no longer have the luxury of saying "oh ew, I do not wish to implement this feature that many of my users want because I personally don't use it." That is unprofessional and lame. Not to mention incredibly self-centered- why would such a person even write software for general distribution in the first place? I know, now comes the part where someone says "well they're unpaid volunteers". That doesn't excuse it either. Volunteer just means no paycheck, it doesn't mean unprofessional and shoddy. |
| dinotrac Jan 07, 2008 7:45 AM EDT |
>That is unprofessional and lame. Not to mention incredibly self-centered- why would such a person even write software for general distribution in the first place? Come on, TC, be honest: Have you ever worked in any IT shop of size that didn't have at least a few folks like that on staff? In proprietary world, they have bosses who tell them to zip it up and do what's needed. One of the very few places where proprietary world has an advantage. Of course, that presumes good bosses, a rather rare commodity in IT. |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 07, 2008 7:59 AM EDT |
Just to pipe in as a developer: In the software I write I do implement features I do not use (but think are cool) or that are not fun to work on. Just because I'd like to create a good product that other people will like using. But there is a limit to how much work I will put into it. With KMail, I don't think it's uncaring developers as much as the sheer magnitude of the problem. For you as an end user it looks like a minor detail, but it's quite a big and complicated problem to fix inside KMail. Spending a few hours working on some annoying thing just to please your users is great. Spending *months* on it probably not so. Solution: Find someone who doesn't think of the problem as "annoying". |
| ComputerBob Jan 07, 2008 9:52 AM EDT |
I think this is a really good discussion, and I really appreciate everyone's feedback and input. Thanks, everyone! |
| tuxchick Jan 07, 2008 10:10 AM EDT |
Of course, dino, you find "folks like that" everywhere. I'm just tired of seeing that same dumb myth, or excuse perhaps, every time a FOSS user makes a feature request or criticizes a piece of software. Sure it's true of some developers and projects. But in my experience most FOSS devs are responsive to feature requests, and some even solicit them. No they can't implement all of them, nor please all of the people all the time. As Sander said, it's more often an issue of limited resources and time, and degree of difficulty. This KMail issue appears to be combination of priorities and a definite hint of attitude. I predict it will be resolved eventually. I still want a lightweight graphical email format without the baggage and insecurity of HTML. Too bad that the biggest abuser of HTML, microsoft, doesn't innovate something like this. (That's a joke there, using "microsoft" and "innovate" in the same sentence.) |
| Bob_Robertson Jan 07, 2008 12:22 PM EDT |
I, as a long-time Kmail user, find the reply function adequate because I always compose in plain text. As others have said, HTML email is a plague. However, since Kmail does have HTML compose, if that is your default then a reply to an HTML email aught to be in HTML. Let me just make sure that that is the problem. If I reply to an HTML email, I myself do not want it to compose in HTML. Plain text is my default, I like that it follows that default. > I still want a lightweight graphical email format without the baggage and insecurity of HTML. Too bad that the biggest abuser of HTML, microsoft, doesn't innovate something like this. (That's a joke there, using "microsoft" and "innovate" in the same sentence.) Be careful, TC. I'm sure they'd love to do it, but it would end up being a proprietary binary-only format. We already have a light-weight graphical email format: ASCII. |
| Richard Jan 07, 2008 12:26 PM EDT |
Just put 5 votes on
http://bugs.kde.org/votes.cgi?action=show_bug&bug_id=86423 Kmail should be not make arbitrary decisions as to how to use email. |
| krisum Jan 07, 2008 6:20 PM EDT |
Quoting: Ya know, this is one of those popular myths that needs to have a stake put through its heart. If that is really the attitude of software developers, then they need to change professions. It may be a myth when taken as applying to every case. However, notice the qualifiers "most" and "such" in the original statement. Quoting: When a developer writes something for personal use and not for public distribution, meh, who cares. But when they're working on a popular project like KDE, then they no longer have the luxury of saying "oh ew, I do not wish to implement this feature that many of my users want because I personally don't use it." That is unprofessional and lame. Not to mention incredibly self-centered- why would such a person even write software for general distribution in the first place? I do not see your point. Many kmail developers are just volunteers so all this talk of "profession" in the strict sense of word is meaningless. You think that insufficient interest of developers in some features is being self-centered. On the contrary, idle demands by the users from such volunteers without any constructive inputs from their side would qualify more as being self-centered. Personally, i have made a few contributions to some free software projects for features which i found missing but claiming this to be an instance of being self-centered makes no sense. Even though i do not use kmail for similar reasons as ComputerBob, there is no reason for me to hold the developers accountable for the features other users or myself find missing. As mentioned, the solution is to sponsor the said features, or (for the developers among us) implement those features ourselves. |
| DrDubious Jan 07, 2008 6:54 PM EDT |
Personally, I'd be very happy with a "pluggable" editor for kmail. If I could toggle the mimetype to "text/html" and pop up kwrite to hand-code an HTML email on those very rare occasions when I feel an urge to do so, I'd be very happy. Indeed, it would give me much better control over the email than a "WYSIWYG" editor. |
| tuxchick Jan 07, 2008 7:05 PM EDT |
Quoting: Many kmail developers are just volunteers so all this talk of "profession" in the strict sense of word is meaningless. Nice bit of misconstruing there. Professionalism is not related to paychecks. Nice characterization of user feedback as "idle demands." I know that some software developers have that level of contempt for their users. Fortunately, I believe that most of them don't. **edit** I have to quit taking grumpy pills, sorry. Let me rephrase: users do have the right to hold software developers accountable. It doesn't matter who gets paid or not paid. Perhaps the problem is in the definition of "itch"- the best software comes from people who have an itch to write great, useful software, rather than being narrowly focused on what meets their own personal needs. |
| krisum Jan 07, 2008 9:01 PM EDT |
Quoting: Professionalism is not related to paychecks. Quoting: It doesn't matter who gets paid or not paid. I never said the contrary, so there is no need for such digressions. However if one is working on something as a volunteer in free time it cannot be said to be the profession of that person. (ya, i know "one can work for whatever time and be professional ..." but try to see the point in question). Quoting: Nice characterization of user feedback as "idle demands." I know that some software developers have that level of contempt for their users. No, user feedback is not "idle demands" and if you read carefully then this was never implied. But when a user starts demanding from volunteers for features and criticizing them as trying to force their opinions when those are not met, then it qualifies as an idle demand. Anyway just to get this back on track, the point being made was that there is no reason to believe that the missing features in kmail are a result of developers trying to force their usage patterns on users or deliberately crippling the software rather is more likely to be a result of lack of resources and/or sufficient developer interest. |
| krisum Jan 07, 2008 9:04 PM EDT |
Quoting: If I could toggle the mimetype to "text/html" and pop up kwrite to hand-code an HTML email on those very rare occasions when I feel an urge to do so, I'd be very happy.Another possibility could be to have something like kword as a pluggable kpart for kmail -- but no idea what it will take to do this. |
| krisum Jan 07, 2008 9:12 PM EDT |
btw this:
Quoting: users do have the right to hold software developers accountable.needs further clarification by way of: a) in what ways do you think that users have the right to hold developers (of such free software) accountable, and b) your reasons for believing the above |
| gus3 Jan 07, 2008 10:11 PM EDT |
It seems to me that there's no accountability until there's a contract (possibly assumed, but confirmed by monetary payment). |
| dinotrac Jan 08, 2008 4:24 AM EDT |
>I never said the contrary, so there is no need for such digressions. You said quite precisely the contrary: Many kmail developers are just volunteers so all this talk of "profession" in the strict sense of word is meaningless. Sure, you weasel word it with quotes and "in the strict sense" so that you won't have to be accountable for your own statement, but you said what you said and now you're running away from it. |
| ComputerBob Jan 08, 2008 4:41 AM EDT |
@krisum, You said, "But when a user starts demanding from volunteers for features and criticizing them as trying to force their opinions when those are not met, then it qualifies as an idle demand." I don't want this discussion to devolve into personal attacks, but if you were referring to my article in that statement, then please note that nowhere have I ever "demanded" anything. I simply stated that KMail lacks the essential HTML features that I -- and many others who have complained about it -- require from my email client. If anything that I've written gave you the impression that I was demanding anything from anyone, then I sincerely apologize for misleading you. |
| krisum Jan 08, 2008 8:01 AM EDT |
Quoting: Many kmail developers are just volunteers so all this talk of "profession" in the strict sense of word is meaningless.Hmm, i do not see any reference to paychecks in that statement. |
| krisum Jan 08, 2008 8:06 AM EDT |
Quoting: I don't want this discussion to devolve into personal attacks There was no intention to resort to personal attacks. Sorry, if that was the impression it generated. |
| ComputerBob Jan 08, 2008 8:13 AM EDT |
@ krisum, None on my part, either. Thanks for confirming it. ;) |
| dinotrac Jan 08, 2008 8:23 AM EDT |
>Hmm, i do not see any reference to paychecks in that statement. Can't stand your own words, can you? >>just volunteers >>"profession" in the strict sense Lest we forget, you can say the sky is blue without direct reference to absorption of the visible light spectrum. |
| thenixedreport Jan 08, 2008 11:10 AM EDT |
I've been able to set up Evolution to load HTML and images, but then again, the only thing I used it for was e-mail anyway. I prefer Thunderbird myself because it can render in HTML. If other mail clients had the ability to render HTML for quite some time and K-Mail still does not, then I would think that the issue would have a higher priority than it does now. |
| jdixon Jan 08, 2008 11:42 AM EDT |
> If other mail clients had the ability to render HTML for quite some time and K-Mail still does not, K-Mail does render HTML mail. It also composes HTML mail if you set it to do so. What it apparently does not do correctly is reply to HTML mail. |
| thenixedreport Jan 08, 2008 1:47 PM EDT |
I should have clarified. If other mail clients had the ability to utilize HTML for quite some time and K-Mail still does not, then I would think that the issue would have a higher priority than it does now. Or... You caught me having a moment of the stupids. My apologies. :) |
| dinotrac Jan 08, 2008 1:50 PM EDT |
>You caught me having a moment of the stupids. My apologies. :) Hey! Never apologize for being stupid. Makes the rest of us feel (unjustifiably) superior. That's a good thing. |
| thenixedreport Jan 08, 2008 1:59 PM EDT |
"Makes the rest of us feel (unjustifiably) superior." Ha! I knew it! |
| krisum Jan 08, 2008 6:27 PM EDT |
Dino,Quoting: Can't stand your own words, can you? There is no need to twist my words to construe meanings which are not there. You think that "not professionals" refers to monetary aspects and try to impose your ideas upon myself. I said what I said and stand by it, and the intended meaning has also been clarified subsequently. If your approach is to see meanings beyond what is being said then I have got nothing to do with it and you can continue to fight air. |
| dinotrac Jan 09, 2008 2:09 AM EDT |
>you can continue to fight air. Well, you're right about air. |
| neclimdul Jan 17, 2008 8:47 PM EDT |
It amazes me that KMail has all these features to interact with other office applications(Outlook, exchange...) with settings and options for dealing with attachments and appointments and everything else. The exception being the most crucial thing, sending a reply that looks decent to these people its been designed to interact with. How does that make any sense? I might even deal with it if it didn't mangle the html and add weird line breaks where they didn't exists before as well. Drives me to use kmail for everything except replying to emails... which makes it half a mail app. amazing... seriously. And a quick note on the bug mentioned early in this thread, its working on being 4 years old... that's a bit crazy by itself... Why aren't there more complaints like this? |
| jdixon Jan 18, 2008 6:54 AM EDT |
> Why aren't there more complaints like this? Most Linux users don't use HTML email. For very good reasons, I might add. |
| ComputerBob Jan 19, 2008 4:04 AM EDT |
> Most Linux users don't use HTML email. For very good reasons, I might add. Please provide your sources for those two statements. |
| jdixon Jan 19, 2008 5:09 AM EDT |
> Please provide your sources for those two statements. Edited for clarity and completeness. :( You are correct. Allow me to rephrase. Almost none of the Linux users I've met or conversed with has used HTML email (though the subject has not always come up). Whether that's a representative sample is debatable. The problems with HTML email are so obvious I don't think they need explanation. If you do, then our viewpoints are too divergent for reasonable discourse on the matter. |
| dinotrac Jan 19, 2008 6:53 AM EDT |
>If you do, then our viewpoints are too divergent for reasonable discourse on the matter. It's my ball, and I can take it home if I want to. |
| hkwint Jan 19, 2008 7:27 AM EDT |
Quoting:>Why aren't there more complaints like this? Most Linux users don't use HTML email.[/quote] Maybe things will change once KDE hits Windows (expected this year). |
| gus3 Jan 19, 2008 9:20 AM EDT |
Quoting:Maybe things will change once KDE hits Windows (expected this year).I doubt it will. The causality relationship between Linux/Windows and using HTML in email is one of common cause, not cause-effect. Windows users want something easy, and don't care about annoyances (that they experience or that they cause). Linux users tend to care more about "do it right," and annoyances are seen as problems to be fixed. My mother, not a power Linux user by any stretch of the imagination, wouldn't dream of sending an HTML-formatted email. If she needs formatting, she'll attach an RTF document. Her Mozilla Mail is configured to remove the HTML formatting on replies. She knows, she cares, and that's the difference between the Windows camp and the Linux camp. Broad brush? Yes. Does that invalidate the argument? You decide. |
| tuxchick Jan 19, 2008 9:38 AM EDT |
I'm in the "it ought to be fixed" camp. Either support HTML or don't; this half-baked functionality doesn't make sense. Look at the cool features KMail has for reading HTML messages: when you set the default to plain text, an HTML message saysQuoting: This is an HTML message. For security reasons, only the raw HTML code is shown. If you trust the sender of this message then you can activate formatted HTML display for this message by clicking here. Easy as pie. Then if it links to external images or possible nasties, you get another message: Quoting: This HTML message may contain external references to images etc. For security/privacy reasons external references are not loaded. If you trust the sender of this message then you can load the external references for this message by clicking here. Again, easy as pie, and the user is in control. So what happened on the road to forming correctly-coded replies to HTML messages? All of a sudden it's evil and wrong, and not only that, but "a giant intricate very very difficult coding problem that requires months of hard labor from our finest minds!" Yeah, OK, whatever. After hearing that for every last little thing, I'm growing skeptical. It's a solved problem with other FOSS mail clients, such as Thunderbird and Evolution. Even if you can't re-use the code because of the license (Thunderbird is under the MPL), you can study it. User have a right to hold developers accountable, even when we don't pay for the software or write code our ownselves. |
| jdixon Jan 19, 2008 10:27 AM EDT |
> I'm in the "it ought to be fixed" camp. Oh, I agree that it ought to be fixed. Those who wish to respond to HTML email with valid HTML email should be able to do so. |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 20, 2008 2:09 AM EDT |
Quoting:Look at the cool features KMail has for reading HTML messages: when you set the default to plain text, an HTML message says "This is an HTML message. For security reasons, only the raw HTML code is shown. If you trust the sender of this message then you can activate formatted HTML display for this message by clicking here." I like Thunderbird better in this regard. It converts the HTML to text/plain if there's no text/plain part in the HTML e-mail. |
| dinotrac Jan 20, 2008 2:59 AM EDT |
>Yeah, OK, whatever. After hearing that for every last little thing, I'm growing skeptical. Are you sure that you're not unduly influenced by the fact that kmail already does the hard stuff and that sending along the original message in HTML form is simply a matter of passing along somethign they either have anyway (if they send it unchanged) or have the code to create (if they pass along one of the messages they already have code to form for your perusal)? So cynical, TC. So cynical. PS - I got a copy of the "LINUX Networking Cookbook" to review for my Ruby on Rails user's group. Is it any good? |
| gus3 Jan 20, 2008 9:09 AM EDT |
Quoting:So what happened on the road to forming correctly-coded replies to HTML messages? All of a sudden it's evil and wrong, and not only that, but "a giant intricate very very difficult coding problem that requires months of hard labor from our finest minds!" Yeah, OK, whatever. After hearing that for every last little thing, I'm growing skeptical.Okay, here's a question: When the sent message body consists of nothing but ill-formed HTML, what should a mail agent do with it when you click "Reply"? If the correct response is "fix it," then how do you determine what the original meant to do/say? Further, how do you protect the parser against ill-formed HTML that was designed to attack it? If the correct response is "don't fix it," then how do you shield your own additions from the ill-formed HTML? Remember, any tag you use to isolate the message can itself be embedded within the message. Please justify your answer in no more than 3 words. |
| dinotrac Jan 20, 2008 9:32 AM EDT |
Either way is fine. Depends on how much effort you want to put in.
Truth is, nobody is going to be upset if you pass along the same bad message they receiveed. >Please justify your answer in no more than 3 words. It should work. |
| hkwint Jan 20, 2008 1:14 PM EDT |
Quoting:I'm in the "it ought to be fixed" camp. Suggestive formulation. Assuming there's something to fix also automatically assumes there's a bug. I think it's hard to find someone who would say a bug is not ought to be fixed. Therefore, instead of arguing if it 'ought to be fixed', it would be more correct to argue if it is a bug or a feature (do I sound like MS here?) As far as I understand after looking at the bug filed at bugzilla (the one I linked to), the KDE developers still haven't resolved this argument, other than saying it's a pointless argument because they don't have the time and people to fix it. All the users agree it is a bug, not a feature. Since we can't blame people with limited time and resources for 'not fixing a bug', it might even be better to speak about a 'missing feature' instead of a bug. |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 20, 2008 1:16 PM EDT |
Quoting:Truth is, nobody is going to be upset if you pass along the same bad message they receiveed. I will. I get enough crap of my own. I don't need to be forwarded someone else's crap as well. |
| hkwint Jan 20, 2008 1:33 PM EDT |
Quoting:Okay, here's a question: When the sent message body consists of nothing but ill-formed HTML, what should a mail agent do with it when you click "Reply"? Ask the user: Do you want to Reply with ill-formed HTML, or strip HTML? The user is ought to tell the computer what should be done, not the other way around. Quoting:If the correct response is "fix it," then how do you determine what the original meant to do/say?Three possibilities to suggest to the user; Reply with ill-formed HTML, strip HTML, or Ask the original author what he / she meant. If enough people use the third option, maybe the persons sending this ill-formed HTML would become aware of it. Still (to me) it looks like there is a satisfactory choice available for anyone. Quoting:Further, how do you protect the parser against ill-formed HTML that was designed to attack it? That's a difficult one. My answer would be "Don't parse, just pass". Quoting:Please justify your answer in no more than 3 words. Three words? Impossible! |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 20, 2008 1:52 PM EDT |
Quoting:That's a difficult one. My answer would be "Don't parse, just pass". The correct answer is "fix the parser". A mail client does not parse javascript. I see no reason why you can't build a safe parser without too much effort. Building a good e-mail client (one that does not simply forward the junk you get) is one small step in the long fight against spam and virusses. |
| tuxchick Jan 20, 2008 3:53 PM EDT |
Quoting: I got a copy of the "LINUX Networking Cookbook" to review for my Ruby on Rails user's group. Is it any good? It isn't Harry Potter, but it has its moments. |
| dinotrac Jan 20, 2008 6:02 PM EDT |
>It isn't Harry Potter, but it has its moments. ;0) |
| gus3 Jan 20, 2008 6:48 PM EDT |
>It isn't Harry Potter, but it has its moments. Sounds like a glowing review for this Harry Potter non-fan. Oh, wait... ;-) |
| herzeleid Jan 20, 2008 7:18 PM EDT |
Quoting: dino: I got a copy of the "LINUX Networking Cookbook" to review for my Ruby on Rails user's group. Is it any good?Eh? Ruby on Rails? I take it you never got the memo from Zed Shaw? |
| dinotrac Jan 21, 2008 7:50 AM EDT |
>Eh? Ruby on Rails? I take it you never got the memo from Zed Shaw? Make Rails and Ruby variables, and you could pretty much apply that rant to every new technology that's ever come along. It certainly would have fit Linux around the turn of the century. |
| herzeleid Jan 21, 2008 10:59 AM EDT |
I agree that this rant http://zedshaw.com/rants/rails_is_a_ghetto.html while written specifically about ROR, certainly applies to the kinds of people you meet in the business world, and to technical trends and fads in general, but how does it apply to linux? |
| dinotrac Jan 21, 2008 11:36 AM EDT |
>but how does it apply to linux? If you had attended big Linux shows in the y2k timeframes, the kinds of people Zed describes would be very familiar. By then, Linux had sprung out of the geek culture that nurtured it and been anointed by the Trumpeteers of Big Bucks. Lots of cock-sure knotheads running around collecting and or shelling out big bucks. |
| herzeleid Jan 21, 2008 2:31 PM EDT |
Quoting: If you had attended big Linux shows in the y2k timeframesI've been a regular attender of every West Coast Linux World expo since 1999, and in that time I've seen some fat cat vendors trying to cash in, but nothing to the extent that Zed exposed in his scathing indictment of the ROR community. |
| dinotrac Jan 21, 2008 4:05 PM EDT |
Zed, I would guess, was a little more personally involved in getting his butt burned. |
| ComputerBob Jan 22, 2008 4:49 AM EDT |
If you want to discuss Ruby on Rails, please start a separate thread about Ruby on Rails. |
| dinotrac Jan 22, 2008 5:48 AM EDT |
>If you want to discuss Ruby on Rails, please start a separate thread about Ruby on Rails. Hmmm. Last I looked, I don't think anybody was doing that. |
| jdixon Jan 22, 2008 6:27 AM EDT |
> If you want to discuss Ruby on Rails, please start a separate thread about Ruby on Rails. ComputerBob, this isn't your forum to control. If Sander, et.al., have a problem with a thread, they'll let us know. |
| ComputerBob Jan 22, 2008 2:05 PM EDT |
jdixon and dinotrac, I'm not trying to control the forum. I realize that this is "your turf" and I'm "the new guy" who should just keep his mouth shut. But as the one whose article this thread is about, I feel a certain responsibility to check this thread every time I see that there's a new post in it, and for the past few days, I counted **nine posts in a row** that were about Ruby on Rails, and had nothing to do with the topic of this thread. I thought it was just common sense (and a rule on nearly every other forum I've been a part of since the early dial-in BBS days) to start a thread when you want to go off-topic, instead of hijacking an existing thread. Of course, if the power-that-be here are fine with you hijacking threads, and think that my request in inappropriate, and don't think that your reaction to my request was rude, then that's their decision and of course I will abide by it. But if that's the case, then people who want to follow the original topic of this thread will probably get tired of wasting their time checking it for new posts. I know I have. And I also feel pretty bad that you've both chosen to get defensive, instead of seriously considering my simple, logical and polite request. |
| tuxchick Jan 22, 2008 2:47 PM EDT |
well computerbob, there's logic, and then there's LXer. A herd of cats and proud of it! |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 22, 2008 2:52 PM EDT |
Yeah. I'm surprised we managed to stay somewhat on-topic for 60 posts in a row :-) |
| dinotrac Jan 22, 2008 3:00 PM EDT |
ComputerBob - If you'll look a little more closely, you'll see that there is actually one (1) post in a row on Ruby on Rails. That would be herzeleid's reference to the Zeb Shaw memo. If you'll look closely, the original reference to RoR was actually a call-out to TuxChick, whose book I am reviewing for my RoR group. Topic : Hey TC, I'm doing your book. then, herzeleid: Topic: Did you see what this guy said about RoR? -- this is the most RoR topic Then several posts about the ubiquity of similar people and experiences in the software world. Then you. |
| jdixon Jan 22, 2008 4:36 PM EDT |
> (and a rule on nearly every other forum I've been a part of since the early dial-in BBS days) You were obviously never on Delphi. > Of course, if the power-that-be here are fine with you hijacking threads, Discussions here tend to meander. No one else seems to mind overly much. > and think that my request in inappropriate, and don't think that your reaction to my request was rude, It was your request which was rude, though it was not inappropriate, if you understand my distinction. You don't walk into someone else's house and complain about the way their furniture is arranged, though you may be privately dismayed. However, you don't know the nature of the fora here, and simply made an unwarranted assumption. It happens, and isn't a problem. In my experience, the editors are not adverse to making their concerns known, and if there's a problem they'll let us know fairly quickly. But unless it's a TOS issue, they keep a fairly loose rein. > ...then people who want to follow the original topic of this thread will probably get tired of wasting their time checking it for new posts. That hasn't tended to be a problem, since most of us read the comments even on articles we don't read. > And I also feel pretty bad that you've both chosen to get defensive, Moi? I wasn't being defensive. I was merely pointing out that you have no authority to assert or enforce editorial control on LXer. Of course, I suspect they could always use another editor... > ...instead of seriously considering my simple, logical and polite request. Simple and logical, yes. Polite, no. > A herd of cats and proud of it! You got that right, TC. :) |
| ComputerBob Jan 23, 2008 4:18 AM EDT |
> It was your request which was rude, though it was not inappropriate, if you understand my distinction. You don't walk into someone else's house and complain about the way their furniture is arranged, though you may be privately dismayed. I'm very sorry to see that that is your attitude. But at least now you've made it very clear that this is your house, and I am a rude intruder. You viewed my simple and polite (yes, POLITE) request as a threat and an insult to your clique. I expect to see that attitude in high-level RTFM forums, but I'm very disappointed to see it here on LXer. In fact, I read several discussions here for several months before I contributed my first article to LXer. LXer always gave me the impression of being very open and welcoming to new visitors and contributors. Thanks for correcting my impression. Maybe you'd like to suggest some new wording for LXer's right column, to make your feelings clear to all new visitors and contributors to Lxer. |
| dinotrac Jan 23, 2008 4:33 AM EDT |
ComputerBob - Jdixon had it exactly backwards - your initial request was not rude, but was inappropriate. I think of the classic tale of manners - On being served soup, the foreign guest at a chi-chi dinner party picks up the bowl and starts to slurp it down. The party's host then picks up his bowl and slurps it down. The rest of the guests follow suit rather than embarrass the foreign visitor. We do have a certain latitude with threads. That said: At least now I know for sure that you consider this to be your house, and I am a rude intruder. My simple request, which was issued with every polite intention, was seen as a threat and an insult to a clique to which you enjoy being a member. Good grief! Not knowing the local ropes is one thing. But a whiner? That's something else altogether, especially somebody who falls into the "methinks he doth protest too much" category. |
| ComputerBob Jan 23, 2008 4:38 AM EDT |
You guys had a knee-jerk reaction to my simple request and circled the wagons. I told you how that made me feel. And now you consider me a whiner. Shut up and take it, ComputerBob! Shut up and take it, you whiner! Ah, I love a good discussion. |
| dinotrac Jan 23, 2008 5:16 AM EDT |
That's the nice thing about vintage whine -- If the first glass don't do it, pour a little more. |
| azerthoth Jan 23, 2008 11:47 AM EDT |
Anyone else notice that in trying to bring it back to topic, and then defending his misinterpretation of the actual conversation good ol bob here has completely derailed the thread? *snort* rails indeed. A good example of how a single misplaced post can spin out in new and interesting ways. |
| jdixon Jan 27, 2008 6:49 PM EDT |
> But at least now you've made it very clear that this is your house, and I am a rude intruder. No, it's LXer's house. I'm merely a tolerated guest, the same as you. > ...was seen as a threat and an insult to a clique to which you enjoy being a member. The idea of my being a member of a clique is almost hilariously funny. > LXer always gave me the impression of being very open and welcoming to new visitors and contributors. No one's asked you to leave have they? Your viewpoints and comments are perfectly welcome. It would be unwise to attribute my viewpoints to everyone else on the fora, or to give them a weight which they do not deserve. I'm a moderate but not frequent poster with an occasional useful insight and a too ofen acerbic attitude/tone, of which you were an unfortunate victim. I have no more authority here than you, and it's unusual for more than a handful of folks to agree with me on any given subject. Just as I said about our posts, if Sander and company have a problem with your posts they'll let you know. The rest of us can be safely ignored if you want, especially me. Which doesn't mean that I think I'm wrong, of course, merely that my opinion carries no more weight than anyone else's. |
| Bob_Robertson Jan 28, 2008 3:52 AM EDT |
Oh blast, I missed a flamewar. Grumble grumble. |
| hkwint Jan 28, 2008 9:05 AM EDT |
You are invited to discuss anything not related to the article, but related to LXer (policies) and other LXer members in the LXer forum: http://lxer.com/module/forums/f/lxer/ I started a new topic where you guys can go on with the off-topic discussion: http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/26712/ Just start a new thread over there if you like. This is not the right place for this discussion, since it is ought to be about the title of the thread, which in this case is called 'no HTML replies: Why I Won't use KMail or Kontact'. Off-topic discussions are allowed to a certain degree, and the general rule of thumb is really simple: Scott - LXer's EiC - decides. Thanks in advance. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jan 28, 2008 10:48 AM EDT |
I agree with Hans, take it to member e-mail where no one will care what is said. |
| jdixon Jan 28, 2008 7:20 PM EDT |
> ...and the general rule of thumb is really simple: Scott - LXer's EiC - decides. Like I said. :) > ... take it to member e-mail where no one will care what is said. Will do Scott. Though I expect the subject has worked itself out. Sorry to cause trouble. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jan 29, 2008 4:32 AM EDT |
There was no trouble caused by you jdixon, it just seems that the conversation got a little personal between a few people. If I interpreted incorrectly, I am sorry. |
| dinotrac Jan 29, 2008 4:45 AM EDT |
Oh sure, people are sorry. What does that do for my badly bruised feelings? I'll need therapy for years. Not that I'll get it -- way too sick for that. |
| ColonelPanik Jan 29, 2008 6:08 AM EDT |
I use Linux, how about you? |
| jdixon Jan 29, 2008 7:06 AM EDT |
> I'll need therapy for years. Hmm, you need to work on your tenses Dino. That should be "I've needed therapy for years." :) |
| jdixon Jan 29, 2008 7:09 AM EDT |
> ...it just seems that the conversation got a little personal between a few people. I think only one person took it that way Scott, but I was the party whose response triggered the exchange. :( While it may not look that way to them, I never intended it as a personal attack. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jan 29, 2008 7:14 AM EDT |
You make a valid point, please don't think you are in trouble, its a matter of nipping things in the bud before things get out of hand. I know it looks like we are a little jumpy in moderating forums recently, but it is for the good of the website that we do it. |
| ColonelPanik Jan 29, 2008 8:41 AM EDT |
Scott, no nipping on Buds. You run a tight ship here but we can't have you being tight. Maybe every morning you could post an "anything" thread. Then we can see how it unravels. dino looks a bit frayed already. |
| happyfeet Jan 29, 2008 9:01 AM EDT |
---a frayed knot... |
| dinotrac Jan 29, 2008 9:33 AM EDT |
or afraid not. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jan 29, 2008 9:53 AM EDT |
You two are hilarious! |
| tuxchick Jan 29, 2008 10:11 AM EDT |
Looks aren't everything. |
| jdixon Jan 29, 2008 10:44 AM EDT |
> ...please don't think you are in trouble... Scott, if I worried about being in trouble, I'd never get anything done. :) I figure you all will tell if me if I step out of line (possibly even politely :)). That's just type of place LXer is. And hopefully I don't need to add that it is much appreciated on my part. |
| dinotrac Jan 29, 2008 12:43 PM EDT |
>possibly even politely Fat chance. |
| tuxrev Mar 19, 2009 11:27 PM EDT |
Quoting: Quoted: tuxchick - I have been reading this thread with great interest. I switched to Ubuntu from XP about six months ago, and with the addition of Virtualbox to run AutoCAD I love it. Computing is fun again. I switched from Evolution to Kmail a few months ago and love it and agree with most of the positive comments here. With regard to your quoted comments above. I care not one iota about sending HTML mail and think that the security question above is a good idea, but it would be nice if Kmail would expand this so that we are not HAVING to click that trust link over and over again for the same users that we trust. Maybe a follow up dialog with an always trust question or something like that. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!