On 3/20/2008 4:05 PM, Ron Wood wrote:
>
> It's a real problem:
> proliferating user base;
> instructions written in either plain-text or html-savvy voice..
> and nothing for the point-and-click/ drag and drop / "why doesnt the d___
> thing do what i want" crowd.
>

These people need to be disabused of the notion that they can control the
recipient's viewing experience. The fact is, the sender has no control over
the manner in which a given message will be displayed for a given recipient.

As long as there are differences between the OS platforms and email clients
used by senders, and the OS platforms and email clients used by recipients,
there will be recipients whose clients do not display the message in the form
intended by the sender. Email created on platform A using client B may not
display in the manner intended by the sender when viewed on platform X using
client Y, or on platform A using client C. Even with the same versions of the
same OS and client, there may be issues, if the recipient has chosen to display
all messages as plain text, or disabled automatic display of images, or the
sender included an attachment created with version x of whizbang, but the
recipient is still using version x-2.

The situation is further complicated by increasingly-aggressive spam filters.
Earlier this week, I tried to send a message to a friend. The message body
contained URL's and embedded images, so I sent the message as both plain
text and HTML. The message was rejected by the spam filter on the recipient's
mail server. I re-sent it without the images; it was rejected. I re-sent it as
plain-text; it was rejected. I re-sent it without the URL's; it was - finally -
accepted and delivered.

Bottom line: Keep it simple; it is more likely to be delivered and displayed
in the form intended by the sender.

--
Paul Russell, Senior Systems Administrator
OIT Messaging Services Team
University of Notre Dame
[log in to unmask]