On 2019-07-10 15:31, Reco wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:35:33AM +0900, John Crawley wrote:On 2019-07-10 01:52, Greg Wooledge wrote:On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 06:48:22PM +0200, mjonsson1986@gmail.com wrote:<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"Please post only text, not HTML. If your email agent *cannot* do plain text alone, at least configure it to send both plain text and HTML. Or, y'know, get a better email agent.Of course text messages are best (and what I use all the time) but surely a decent mail agent on the receiver's end will display that OK?A subverted XHTML produced by Microsoft Word? You're joking, right? It will display *somehow*, that's for sure. But to display it as "intended" you'll need something from M$.
Well, just to display the text, without the html tags is not that hard. As to how it was "intended" to be, who knows?
On Thunderbird the OP was perfectly readable, and I had no idea it wasn't plain text till I checked the source.It was readable in my mutt too. Still does not make it right.
I was never trying to claim that it was OK to send messages as html - I always use plain text myself - but I thought there might be something to be said for user agents that could deal with html in some sane way, and without exposing the recipient to attacks. Simply not following any web links would be enough I'd have thought? Or are there some more subtle attack paths?
As you've pointed out, mutt does OK. If all the posters to debian-user refrained from including html in their messages, it would not remove the need for MUAs to cope with it.
-- John