Re: Why choose plain text over HTML email?
Actually it's not only incorrect, but precisely the result of the unfortunate evolution I was describing. Graphic designers took over the original tool and abused it so "My page looks better than the other guy's." There are obvious commercial reasons why this happened.
On 2/15/2020 21:42, D R Stinson wrote:
The fact is, when you use HTML, you force the reader to use the size, color and font of what you've written.
You can still create web pages which are completely non-specific as regard to fonts and colors. Wake Interfaith Disaster Team is a website I originally created in 2011 using raw HTML, restricted to HTML 1 and 2. There are no specifications of fonts, column widths, etc. The browser defaults are used throughout. A surprise benefit of this is that it works reasonably on phones and tablets with no changes. Another is REALLY FAST page loading.
(Yes, these pages are a little ugly--I had to bang them out late at night while managing disaster recovery as a volunteer during the day. And the colors are awful, they tell me. I'm colorblind and pick colors which great mutual discrimination for me.I can name some websites where the colors for visited and unvisited links appear so similar that I cannot distinguish them.)
I had done some work on projects for people with disabilities and learned that the more you "make things pretty" the more you break screen readers, people with impaired color vision, and others.