On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 06:48:37PM -0600, Vernon Schryver wrote:
[...]
> All of that can be done in pure ASCII.
> You don't have to be Shakespear to communicate with the written word
> without more punctuation than existed in 1960. There was no global plague
> in 1970 that damage all English speaking brains so that they could no
> longer communicate without 256 colors of foreground and background, and
> 1000 typefaces. "Smileys" are particularly lame. No joke is made funny
> with a smiley nor is any insult prevented.
Actually... On the point of smilies, I will give you an argument
and that argument is that you've missed the real point. We are in a
multicultural environment here. Some participants do not speak English
as their first language or maybe not even as their second. Many, even
amongst the English based, don't understand each other idionyms and slang
terms. How many know that the term "sheeetload" is a Southern US American
metric measure of volume? :-) Communications goes above and beyond
simple words.
In f2f communications, they say that the majority of communications
is non-verbal. Body language, intonation, expressions, all play a part.
Smilies are an, abet lame, attempt to add some of that non-verbal language
back into written communications. It helps convey the point of humor to
those who do might not recognize it. It helps convey sarcasm and refine
remarks to direct them along the lines which they are meant. I've used
numerous remarks that could be taken seriously, humorously, figuratively,
or literally and the thing that stands between communication and
missunderstanding are those darn smilies to convey the underlying meaning.
This is especially important when you can't even be sure what country
or culture you are communicating with.
I will say that HTML is IMHO worthless and inappropriate in
E-Mail. Similies, OTOH, are much like the universal symbol signs we
see up every. Their purpose is to convey meaning even when the language
is not [fully] understood. And language, in this case, means one hell
of a lot more than one word strung after another. :-/
> The conventions of bullet lists such as rendered by <LI> are also mere
> conventions as opaque to the uninitiated as astrisks or capitalization
> for emphasis. Most of use are bright enough to not need any explicit
> initiation to any reasonable convention; even smileys were obvious when
> there was only 1 kind.
[...]
> Email is not a general purpose hammer. All of those things work
> far better with various other mechanisms than crammed into email.
> Email can be a useful part of such systems, but competently designed
> systems DO NOT do such things purely in email.
Could not agree more.
> Worse, when crammed into email, those mechanisms are *INEVITABLE*
> serious security problems. Email is not only for communications
> among intimates, such as you and your Human Resources Department.
> If you let your MUA fully decode HTML every time you read a message, then
> you are in deep trouble. It's not just the Java and Javascript. Do you
> really want to tell strangers every time you look at their email because
> it contains an <HREF> to a unique URL created just for the purpose?
[...]
> Vernon Schryver [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike
--
Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(The Mad Wizard) | (770) 331-2437 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
