Posted by asdf on 01/30/07 13:33

"Jussist" <jussist@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1170153005.367450.229260@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=html+email
> +good&word2=html+email+bad
>
> It is not as simple as that. I've built one newsletter application,
> which creates the html-file, and saves it to server. The email sent
> consisted of two parts.
>
> 1) link to the newsletter
> 2) email as html
>
> If one couldn't see the html -version, they could easily click to the
> site. Another choice would be to add all the contents as text-version
> also. HTML -email, when used as newsletter, has many advantages.
> Personally I prefer receiving txt-only, but I don not resent html.
>
> One could also argue, that html is bad in web as well. Use text only -
> the same information can be delivered. But websites, or email, is not
> just about content.
>


WTF???? What IS it about then? The technology??? LMGDAO. Methinks you
confuse "content" with "presentation". "Content is King", man.

I agree that heavy-weight email is pure and simply annoying, as are web
pages that contain annoying flash-based advertising or popups, and
superfluously HUGE graphics. But saying that websites aren't just about
content is just rubbish. A case of the tail wagging the dog? Of COURSE it's
about content. A website without information is useless, man. It SHOULD be
about content. Methinks that folks that put the delivery method and
presentation technologies above the actual content are deluding themselves
:)) ... and that users of said "services" are smarter than perhaps u think
:)))

Content is not necessarily measured in bits or bytes. Content *should* be
measured in usefulness of information , IMHO. If HTML-based email can be
demonstrated to be useful, from the recipient's perspective, WTF is wrong
with that? It can be used to enhance the message you are trying to portray,
just as it can in web pages.

As a developer, one should ensure that any enhancements are consistent with,
and complimentary to, the information one is presenting, otherwise you are
"changing the message", and it just ends up like so much more commercial
TV... boring, tedious, and uninforming... think "Letterman" and you get the
idea... Users of the "information" are quick to see through such tactics.

....my 2 cents.

[Back to original message]