Re: small font

On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 07:17:51PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote: [...] > FWIW to any not familiar with how email was 30+ years ago, M$ and Win95 seem > to be > the root blame for the practice of both use of not only HTML for email by > default, > but also of defaulting to imposition of a smaller th

Re: small font

Van Snyder composed on 2024-07-06 14:13 (UTC-0700): > I know what to do to read messages with tiny fonts -- if I can see > enough of it to decide they're interesting. > So far, only one correspondent, whom I have by-and-large concluded > doesn't have anything interesting to way. > What I'm offer

Re: small font

On Sat, 2024-07-06 at 15:41 +0100, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: > > It's not my responsibility to deal with messages the senders aren't > > serious about being read. > > It's up to you of course but if that's your opinion then you always > have the option of simply not reading messages that a

Re: small font

Van Snyder wrote: > It's not my responsibility to deal with messages the senders aren't > serious about being read. It's up to you of course but if that's your opinion then you always have the option of simply not reading messages that are sent (against list guidelines) with HTML parts that sug

Re: small font

On 06/07/2024 01:01, Van Snyder wrote: I'm not able to read this message. I do not think you will manage to achieve anything on this way. The person has clearly expressed that their are not going to follow recommendations concerning message format and do not care if messages cause trouble fo

Re: small font

On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 15:04 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: > I don't use Evolution, but I suspect being a Gnome application that > it works like > web browsers, where fonts can be enlarged using Ctrl-+ as many times > as it takes > to grow the fonts adequately. Possibly it also has a minimum > displayed

Re: small font

Van Snyder composed on 2024-07-05 11:45 (UTC-0700): > On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 14:07 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >> > I'm not able to read this message. >> Can you suggest to us why you think that might be? > Because the message was composed in html using a very small font, and > my mail reader (ev

Re: small font

On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 14:07 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: > > I'm not able to read this message. > > Can you suggest to us why you think that might be? Because the message was composed in html using a very small font, and my mail reader (evolution) automatically prefers to read mail in html. I've n

Re: small font

Van Snyder composed on 2024-07-05 11:01 (UTC-0700): > I'm not able to read this message. Can you suggest to us why you think that might be? > On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 14:01 +0200, Richard wrote: >> You really need to better read who writes what. I didn't start the >> discussion on message sizes d

Re: small font

I'm not able to read this message. On Fri, 2024-07-05 at 14:01 +0200, Richard wrote: > You really need to better read who writes what. I didn't start the > discussion on message sizes due to HTML, I simply ended it because of > irrelevance. > > On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 1:30 PM Greg Wooledge > wrot

Re: small font

Thank god nobody needs help from people so hung up on absolute irrelevant stuff and rules that haven't made sense in decades - if ever. As you may have read from the threads, those rules aren't undisputed at all. If they where seen as relevant as some people want to make believe, the list maintaine

Re: small font

Richard (12024-07-05): > You really need to better read who writes what. I didn't start the > discussion on message sizes due to HTML, I simply ended it because of > irrelevance. And that ended the willingness of many people to help you. Good luck with your problems. -- Nicolas George

Re: small font

You really need to better read who writes what. I didn't start the discussion on message sizes due to HTML, I simply ended it because of irrelevance. On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 1:30 PM Greg Wooledge wrote: > [...] you chose to shift the topic to message > sizes (which isn't the primary reason HTML e

Re: small font

On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 10:51:12 +0200, Richard wrote: > And who was talking about transport? The whole discussion was about > storage, and storing mail compressed is hardly a security issue. The discussion was originally about your messages containing directives to render all of your text in a sm

Re: small font

And who was talking about transport? The whole discussion was about storage, and storing mail compressed is hardly a security issue. On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 5:02 AM Jeffrey Walton wrote: > Compression is a security hole. It leaks information. It should be > disabled. Infact, TLS v1.3 removed it f

Re: small font

Not how lossless compression works. The final size depends much more on the content than on how much content there is. By no means it's "proportional". On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 10:09 PM Michel Verdier wrote: > Compression reduces the size but it's proportionnal so don't negate the > extra html siz

Re: small font

> Compression reduces the size but it's proportionnal so don't negate the > extra html size. The global size will always be 4-10x. No, the compression is not proportional. HTML is naturally very redundant, and machine-generated HTML like the one seen in Richard's email tends to be excruciatingly

Re: small font

On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 2:58 PM Richard wrote: > > Right, because 4x = 10x. Jesus, stop being so ridiculous. Also, there's some > magic trick called compression. Compression is a security hole. It leaks information. It should be disabled. Infact, TLS v1.3 removed it from the protocol. Also see

Re: small font

On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 9:58 AM jeremy ardley wrote: > > On 4/7/24 17:13, Roger Price wrote: > > > > The Debian mailing list Code of Conduct at > > https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/ > > is clear: > > > > « Please don't send your messages in HTML; use plain text instead » > > I presume there is s

Re: small font

On 2024-07-04, Richard wrote: > Right, because 4x = 10x. Jesus, stop being so ridiculous. Also, there's > some magic trick called compression. Human readable text is especially easy > to compress, basically negating all those effects. So just stick to > reality, everything else is just embarrassin

Re: small font

Right, because 4x = 10x. Jesus, stop being so ridiculous. Also, there's some magic trick called compression. Human readable text is especially easy to compress, basically negating all those effects. So just stick to reality, everything else is just embarrassing. On Thu, Jul 4, 2024, 16:48 Greg Woo

Re: small font

On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 16:19:44 +0200, Richard wrote: > If you ever want to be taken seriously, stop spreading such bogus nonsense. > Even base64 encoding wouldn't blow up the size that much. No idea what bs > mail you are talking about, but for me, both the plain text and html > version are said

Re: small font

If you ever want to be taken seriously, stop spreading such bogus nonsense. Even base64 encoding wouldn't blow up the size that much. No idea what bs mail you are talking about, but for me, both the plain text and html version are said to be 4k in size (by du). Even though that's not that exact, si

Re: small font

The bug is reported already, as that's by no means what's intended or what the settings would suggest. Anything beyond that is out of my hands. And as already explained, since there are enough tools out there to have messages look the way you want, this simply doesn't have any priority. Best On T

Re: small font

On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 11:29:43 +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Regrettably the list archives seem to have a preference for publishing > the HTML version of list mails. At least i see two different fonts in > an archived mail of Richard: > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2024/07/msg00124.htm

Re: small font

On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 19:09:47 +0800, jeremy ardley wrote: > Unless there is a compelling reason to accept mixed format ( HTML ) I can't > see why the list can't filter submissions to text only - which is the list > policy anyway - and by doing so provide education to users about what the > list

Re: small font

On 2024-07-04, jeremy ardley wrote: > The problem is mostly because users have email software that automatically > uses mixed format. That's not their fault as they are probably unaware of the > problem. And lots of MUA only show HTML version, hiding the text copy and the problem. > Unless there

Re: small font

On 07/04/2024 06:09 AM, jeremy ardley wrote: On 4/7/24 18:34, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: But let me try: perhaps because the people who set up the mailing list don't believe in enforcing behavior by technological means, but rather by convincing people? If I understand the history correctly: -

Re: small font

On 4/7/24 18:34, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: But let me try: perhaps because the people who set up the mailing list don't believe in enforcing behavior by technological means, but rather by convincing people? If I understand the history correctly: - All early email lists were text only - After

Re: small font

On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 06:20:22PM +0800, jeremy ardley wrote: > > > On 4/7/24 17:13, Roger Price wrote: > > > > The Debian mailing list Code of Conduct at > > https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/ > > is clear: > > > > « Please don't send your messages in HTML; use plain text instead » > > I p

Re: small font

On 4/7/24 17:13, Roger Price wrote: The Debian mailing list Code of Conduct at https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/ is clear: « Please don't send your messages in HTML; use plain text instead » I presume there is some compelling reason that the mailing list doesn't filter html emails an

Re: small font

On Thu, 4 Jul 2024, Michel Verdier wrote: Tell that to your mail progra= ---^^^ I would add that it's up to the *sender* mail program to send text only mail to this list (and others). As the html part is useless and multiply the mail size by almost 10.

Re: small font

Hi, Michel Verdier wrote: > I would add that it's up to the *sender* mail program to send text only > mail to this list (and others). I found this link in the monthly list FAQ: https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct where i read: "Please don't send your messages in HTML; use pl

Re: small font

On 2024-07-04, Max Nikulin wrote: >> Tell that to your mail program. If it chooses to show you the mail that way, >> don't blame me. > > - insisting on an "industry standard" mail style > >> > y:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small">Tell that to your mail progra= > >