Re: HTML for email
Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Mon, 01 March 2021 18:27 UTC
Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071363A20EA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 10:27:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zoHl--EHvAe4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 10:27:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95AC43A20E8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 10:27:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC2A95C019D; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 13:27:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 01 Mar 2021 13:27:09 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=alTN75 Rw/lx6bjo50bGt9T87SeyKOmTzA2GoX0RFrYI=; b=cyXb9MgZjA5cluPxhhJQNY szJ/zkv4Zw5T6PvUUvyYCErDm5CcOUO6YOWL1wBrsonIgaKQYiLhNJbnA0sT6arS G4h1ID8T+ErVRug7AFQlO79b8Zu9eFOqRfbIoQ8+AlWoVrfxFBwUmaJw93rkAyTL U5GXb5FT+IfA8FbZAsI8XnTL0jTF23J8XTSznSLbjiYKymBgpAGEFjKJMlYW/agy D5lKm1kZlwVQ2J7DSUgEXHWmAvkvSi/47xixMlZXzSIX1hsbzfTM8/yenXl7JCC7 IVWeoydgyPPm0V3LXrxjQ5b1ZgfZhwM8135iPDDefhO47pyywVS7s7zEZcUs5j9w ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:_TE9YFZ2AjB7mkAi3XF_dylLzWfSAvD45RA182djTXVPwIFw-aiOPQ> <xme:_TE9YMbCm5pp7GVzYUlVvJZXF_8_7gNzpmHZLJaTk8VYSjWCj5lDA-NuK4If238cP BjYsJVobrCMMA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrleekgdduuddvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtsegrtderredtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhh ucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqe enucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeevfeetudeigedtledvvddtudefjeejffdvfeetjeeiueel gfdtgfegtdffkeetudenucfkphepuddtkedrvddvuddrudektddrudehnecuvehluhhsth gvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhoohhrvgesnhgvthif ohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:_TE9YH8qOP-kwRBwbi6O4tzqsONNf2YAcNj0wrAborEzdd4EtvB0Kw> <xmx:_TE9YDqeD7VX2dlpk-4m1egBPspHV78_5gLAr19W5cyDNJL9Ivt9ug> <xmx:_TE9YAo_ioXUM9w5m7BJV-WF3a__Hspjed5zMuTKK2WxEW_BC-kD0w> <xmx:_TE9YN0Vj8hNReW3zUGb4waauFVTPm4i_SplD1wYMDkaHrR8lI_gvg>
Received: from [192.168.1.90] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 359D9240057; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 13:27:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: HTML for email
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <20210227190200.06ED46F10439@ary.qy> <4064.1614454347@localhost> <s1f0vo$ejp$1@gal.iecc.com> <59240886-320d-fae3-6b98-7b83dacaf5e7@network-heretics.com> <CAMm+LwhWCsG68GOws-Zm9TDcEZ4trGBhq7Dm-_0Ci8Ri7kDK=Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Message-ID: <ecf84c57-97e4-e9ac-6836-4e61b654260c@network-heretics.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2021 13:27:07 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwhWCsG68GOws-Zm9TDcEZ4trGBhq7Dm-_0Ci8Ri7kDK=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------C64B448CCC9F175E9E7023FF"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/mbfk250FNHCzYNC5kgkNgyF8Gpk>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2021 18:27:14 -0000
On 3/1/21 9:22 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > Yes HTML is a disaster for email. But so is plaintext wrapped at 66 > characters by the server because people didn't know better. Ok, first please understand that I'm not blaming anyone. I'm also not making any proposal, at least not yet, and I am not currently sure about the best way forward. I'm just making some observations based on long-term experience with email collaboration in IETF. In some sense, plain text works better for IETF's needs than HTML, and maybe plain text works better for the needs of anyone doing technical discussion over email. There is some virtue in simplicity. One of the virtues of plain text email is that there's not (much of) a layer of interpretation between the text in the message and what the recipient sees. (Of course there is a layer - the character encoding scheme - but not much more than that.) That's not to say that there are no technical problems with plain text email or that it can't be improved. Bbut the biggest problem with improving either is one of deployment. > > The reasons HTML is a disaster are > > 1) There is no standard for HTML in email. While true, it's not immediately clear that HTML is readily extensible to fix these problems, because it needs to be defined in such a way that a variety of MUA implementations produce consistent behavior when multiple parties make successive edits/replies to a message, when portions of multiple messages are quoted in a message, and so on. You might, for instance, need to specify the representation of text copied from one email and pasted to another. One way to view the problem of HTML in email, is that in email you need to have the ability of many different parties to edit the document over and over, by different implementations, without producing a corrupted mess. HTML is not designed for that. But plain text email has a similar problem, and so does every "word processor" format I've seen that's more complex than, say, WordStar. Anyone who has been around IETF for awhile has seen the effect of multiple layers of line-wrapping and ">" (or similar marks) added at the beginning of lines. (Actually the problem is even worse, because some MUAs used in a conversation will treat the quoted parts as plain text and others will try to make them into HTML. So you get multiple incompatible layers.) Still, humans can manually "clean up" text that has been subject to that kind of repeated alteration. But cleaning up HTML that has suffered similar damage generally doesn't happen, partly because there's a layer between the actual HTML and the user interface that keeps users from doing exactly what they need. (I'm not suggesting that we should instead edit the raw HTML in messages when composing replies. In addition to requiring participants to be HTML experts, the HTML generated by most MUAs is far too messy for that.) > 2) HTML has been turned into a presentation format. I realize this is heresy, but a presentation format is what people actually need in the vast majority of cases. Semantic markup has its place. When you're writing a book or maybe even a long article, you need to focus on content, not layout. The presentation needs to be fine-tuned after the content is written or mostly written, and often by different people than those who wrote the content. (and sometimes the content is tweaked for the sake of presentation). Semantic markup makes good sense for that kind of application. But for discussion, a semantic markup layer just gets in the way. That's also true for most web pages. Web developers need to be able to dictate what the content looks like on the screen (while still being responsive to different kinds of displays), and they're forced to deal with a layer that tries to second-guess them. > 3) Email messages used annotations for a decade before HTML which > doesn't support them Right. And it turns out that we need annotations in email. > 4) The SMTP email infrastructure does not provide a viable means of > knowing what formats are accepted by a recipient so there is no way to > fix this. I'm not sure that would solve the problem at least for IETF's case, or for any use case that involves large numbers of potential participants. When you compose a message to send to a mailing list, should your user agent poll the capability of every recipient to find out what kind of message format each can accept? Should it send out different formats to different recipients? Should it try to identify a common subset so it only has to generate one message and so that recipients' experiences will be more consistent? What if you have an email conversation between a small number of people, a new recipient is added, and everyone's messages change format because the new recipient's capabilities don't support the common subset of the other recipients? What about the very common case when a single recipient has multiple user agents with different capabilities? In other words, be careful what you wish for. There's a lot of value in having a common format and minimal set of capabilities that everyone supports. > > One painful side effect of 1 and 2 is that messages come with embedded > font size specifiers which is beyond stupid. The sender has no idea > what device I am reading something on. But Gmail will happily chose > font size settings that are frequently stupid. I have no control over > that as a user. > > But the last point is the most important because the difficulty of > fixing the SMTP infrastructure has become greater than the difficulty > of replacing it with something fit for purpose. SMTP has turned out to be surprisingly (to me at least) fit for purpose. It was designed in an era when you couldn't expect complete and full-time connectivity between senders and receivers, and also couldn't expect everyone to have access to the same network (e.g. ARPAnet vs. X.25), so it used store-and-forward. But it turned out that store-and-forward was useful even in environments that could provide complete connectivity. And later on it turned out to be useful for getting mail through firewalls. In many environments store-and-forward is used to implement spam filters, virus filters, etc., to hide internal enterprise network infrastructure from outside viewers, and several other purposes. And store-and-forward helps make email more reliable, because it separates the problem of persistent delivery from the sending user agent's responsibility. I do think some sort of recipient capability discovery could be useful for most messages that are sent to relatively few recipients (and actually had a proposal for this a few years ago, specifically to discover recipients' public keys), but probably not for IETF-style email discussions. And implementing capability discovery for email means basically having two kinds of services that need to stay in sync, which creates additional risks. Keith
- Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Fernando Gont
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Bron Gondwana
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Keith Moore
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Dominique Lazanski
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Dominique Lazanski
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Carsten Bormann
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Bron Gondwana
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Bron Gondwana
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Stephen Farrell
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Keith Moore
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Dan Harkins
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Roman Danyliw
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Kathleen Moriarty
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Donald Eastlake
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Fernando Gont
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Carsten Bormann
- Making headway in the IETF [was Diversity and Inc… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Making headway in the IETF [was Diversity and… Keith Moore
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Mark Nottingham
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Keith Moore
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the… Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the… Bron Gondwana
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Mary Barnes
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Bill Woodcock
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Tim Bray
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the… Bron Gondwana
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Keith Moore
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Jim Fenton
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Building Real Internet Platforms Mark Nottingham
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Larry Masinter
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the… Jim Manico
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Carsten Bormann
- We appear to still be litigating OAuth, oops Bron Gondwana
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF S Moonesamy
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Keith Moore
- RE: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Hannes Tschofenig
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Vittorio Bertola
- coders in IETF (was: Diversity and Inclusiveness … Keith Moore
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Carsten Bormann
- RE: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Bron Gondwana
- Re: coders in IETF (was: Diversity and Inclusiven… Bron Gondwana
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Bron Gondwana
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Neil Madden
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Aaron Parecki
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Jim Willeke
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Aaron Parecki
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Mary Barnes
- Re: coders in IETF (was: Diversity and Inclusiven… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Tim Bray
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Christian Huitema
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Warren Parad
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Warren Parad
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Warren Parad
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Michael Richardson
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Phillip Hunt
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Michael Thomas
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Vittorio Bertola
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Keith Moore
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Keith Moore
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Michael Thomas
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: coders in IETF (was: Diversity and Inclusiven… Christian Hopps
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Bron Gondwana
- Re: coders in IETF (was: Diversity and Inclusiven… Christian Huitema
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Jen Linkova
- Academia (Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the … Theresa Enghardt
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Dan Harkins
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Theresa Enghardt
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Christian Huitema
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF S Moonesamy
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Fernando Gont
- RE: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Hannes Tschofenig
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Hannes Tschofenig
- RE: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF S Moonesamy
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Theresa Enghardt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Warren Parad
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Seán Kelleher
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Seán Kelleher
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Lars Eggert
- RE: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Andrew Campling
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Marc Petit-Huguenin
- document writing/editing tools used by IETF Keith Moore
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Salz, Rich
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Keith Moore
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Keith Moore
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Keith Moore
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Carsten Bormann
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Joel M. Halpern
- RE: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Larry Masinter
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Keith Moore
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF S Moonesamy
- RE: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Larry Masinter
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Lars Eggert
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Lars Eggert
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Julian Reschke
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Lars Eggert
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Lars Eggert
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Fernando Gont
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Lars Eggert
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Colin Perkins
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Andrew McConachie
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Vittorio Bertola
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Bill Woodcock
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Carsten Bormann
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Justin Richer
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Tim Bray
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Aaron Parecki
- How to tell people... Was: We appear to still be … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Keith Moore
- Re: How to tell people... Was: We appear to still… Keith Moore
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Julian Reschke
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Carsten Bormann
- RE: document writing/editing tools used by IETF STARK, BARBARA H
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Christian Huitema
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Michael Thomas
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… David Waite
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Aaron Parecki
- Re: coders in IETF (was: Diversity and Inclusiven… Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF John Levine
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Carsten Bormann
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Michael Richardson
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Carsten Bormann
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Keith Moore
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Carsten Bormann
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Brian E Carpenter
- Re: How to tell people... Was: We appear to still… Michael Richardson
- Re: How to tell people... Was: We appear to still… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF John Levine
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Keith Moore
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Michael Richardson
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Christian Huitema
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… John Wroclawski
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF John Levine
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Bron Gondwana
- Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in … Bron Gondwana
- HTML for email (was: Re: document writing/editing… Keith Moore
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Vittorio Bertola
- Re: HTML for email (was: Re: document writing/edi… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Warren Parad
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] We appear to still be litigating O… Jeff Craig
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: HTML for email tom petch
- RE: HTML for email Larry Masinter
- Re: document writing/editing tools used by IETF Salz, Rich
- RE: document writing/editing tools used by IETF STARK, BARBARA H
- Re: HTML for email Keith Moore
- Re: HTML for email Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: HTML for email (was: Re: document writing/edi… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: HTML for email Nico Williams
- Re: HTML for email Nico Williams
- Re: HTML for email Nico Williams
- Re: HTML for email Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: HTML for email Keith Moore
- Re: HTML for email Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: HTML for email Bron Gondwana
- Re: HTML for email John Levine
- RE: HTML for email Larry Masinter
- Re: HTML for email Brian E Carpenter
- Re: HTML for email Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: HTML for email tom petch
- Re: HTML for email tom petch
- Re: HTML for email ned+ietf
- Re: HTML for email Nick Hilliard
- Re: HTML for email Keith Moore
- Re: HTML for email ned+ietf
- Re: HTML for email tom petch
- Re: HTML for email Nick Hilliard
- Re: HTML for email Nico Williams
- Re: HTML for email tom petch
- Re: HTML for email Nico Williams
- Re: HTML for email Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: HTML for email Keith Moore
- RE: HTML for email Larry Masinter
- Re: HTML for email Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: HTML for email Keith Moore
- Re: HTML for email Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: HTML for email Keith Moore
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inc… Wes Hardaker