Reply to your enquiry

[Raul A. Gallegos]

I totally agree Ann.  But life and trends being the way they are right now
there is nothing we can do about html messages.  I am not big on webmail for
that exact reason yet I have it on my site for my friends who use
asmodean.net to check their email?  Why? because these friends of mine don't
know better.  I tease them about it.  So am I advocating html and web usage
for email?  Probably if you look at it that way, but I don't like it.


PS: Just as a smartass remark, there are more than just ftp, telnet, http,
pop3 style traffic on the web, oops on the net.  lol.  But I'm sure you know
that.  As I said, smiling big as I'm being a smartass.
--
If you perceive that there are four possible ways in which a procedure can
go wrong, and circumvent these, then a fifth way will promptly develop.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ann Parsons" <akp at eznet.net>
To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: Reply to your enquiry


> Hi all,
>
> Yeh, Raul, that's true, very true, but email is supposed to be email
> and HTML is supposed to be kept where it belongs, on the web.  Maybe
> I'm a purist, but darn it all, the Net has four main parts to it:
> ftp, email, telnet and html.  The Net is not sononymous with the web!
> The web is on the net, but all the net is not the web.  I just want
> some kind of separation folks!  Email is email and should, if really
> taken to its final outcome, be run by engines and software that are
> accessed via email messages, not via the web.  But I preach in vain, I
> preach in vain.  People yack about The Web when they mean The Net.
> People *will* send email in HTML because they don't know any better
> way to do it, and Billy-Boy gates perpetuates the myth.  "They don't
> make email the way they used to..." said in an old quavery voice.