HTML Linking

[Randall Hofland]

Ah! I believe Scott has hit the nail on the head and this may also
explain the duplicate mail I get from some of you (I had originally
thought it was due to the "reply" to multiple senders but perhaps not)!
Yes indeed, Knowledge is Power!!!

Thanks for the input and I apologize to all for my errors in sending the
URL information (it was likely due to sending in "both" and that can be
remedied). I hope you all don't see this as another of my stupid
questions or comments. I never noticed this on my own system, for some
unexplained reason everything I send to "discuss" shows up only once in
my mail. Most curious!

Again, thanks for the help and profound apologies for my insolence.

Scott Lanning wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Randall Hofland wrote:
> >My info list specifically sent the URLs in hypertext linkage as a
> >convenience for anyone wishing to look up the info.. Perhaps that is
> >why they were offended although I seem to get a lot of HTML links in
> >my email from the discuss at blu.org. Ironically it is often
> >"self-advertising" embedded in the signature file. I don't use OE
> >but use my Netscape Communicator for email and it will ask me before
> >sending HTML. Still, what is the specific issue with doing so? Is
> >this a predjudice or is there good logic behind the complaint? If
> >security filters pick up on HTML or there is a processing overhead I
> >am unaware of I'd understand.
>
> I just checked your original message again (didn't look too close
> first time -- just didn't delete it so I could look at the links
> later :) and see that what happened is you sent *two* copies
> of your message. One copy, 13 lines, was plain text (MIME type
> was 'text/PLAIN'); the other copy, 9 lines, was HTML
> (MIME type 'text/HTML').
> I know this does annoy some people. I believe there are
> two reasons: 1) two copies of the message are sent, which
> is a "waste" of bandwidth (this is a bit anal, however,
> considering the amount of wasted bandwidth there is, especially
> compared to all the binary porn newsgroups, but I do understand
> their desire to be unredundant :)
> 2) it mucks up some mail readers, especially when people receive
> "digest" forms of mailing lists (like, every message after the
> HTML one will be messed up or something -- I've never actually
> had this happen but have heard of it)
> So, I guess the fact that you posted a link isn't "bad", just the
> fact that you posted in HTML is.
>
>

-
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).