Re: HTML for email

Nick Hilliard <> Tue, 02 March 2021 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C593A293A for <>; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 07:55:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EvNTvuG-GkKQ for <>; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 07:55:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A81B3A2939 for <>; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 07:55:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from crumpet.local ( [] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 122FtI33017330 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 2 Mar 2021 15:55:19 GMT (envelope-from
X-Authentication-Warning: Host [] (may be forged) claimed to be crumpet.local
Subject: Re: HTML for email
Cc: tom petch <>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <>
References: <20210227190200.06ED46F10439@ary.qy> <4064.1614454347@localhost> <s1f0vo$ejp$> <> <> <> <> <20210301232237.GI30153@localhost> <> <> <>
From: Nick Hilliard <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 15:55:16 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.46
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2021 15:55:29 -0000 wrote on 02/03/2021 14:08:
> And like it or not, outside the IETF the HTML horse left the barn a
> long time back.

Bear in mind that even within the IETF, plenty of people view the entire 
HTML email debate as flogging the proverbial dead horse, and when it 
rolls around every several months, welcomes it in the same way that you 
might welcome an outbreak of cold sores.

> We can chose to deal with or ignore it, but getting
> it back in the barn is not an option.
Looking at this from a different perspective, in the twenty-something 
years of discussion since Content-Type: text/html first appeared, have 
any actionable and viable suggestions emerged about how to deal with 
html email, other than stripping it off in the archived emails?

Maybe the people who are upset about html email could form a working 
group, take the discussion there and write up an ID with observations 
and recommendations for html emails at the ietf?