|
Quick point of order…you said:
But HTML isn't just about fancy formatting. Do you want to put a simple image in a message, rather than adding it as an attachment—say, a corporate logo in your email signature? Woops, can't do that without HTML. And have you noticed how plain plain text actually is? That's right, no italics, bold, or highlighting. I'm sure most people don't worry about these things when they dash off an email message—particularly if they're already fluent in the even more primitive formatting of text messaging. And I'm also sure that most people who do use these formatting controls in Outlook don't realize they're calling on HTML to get the job done.
To me that reads like you’re saying Outlook 2010 won’t support those things. Except Outlook 2007 (and 2010) supports that level of HTML just fine. Bold, Italics, even highlighting works just fine in Outlook. So do horizontal lines, as you can see above. And yes, you can embed images too…
(This is a lot prettier than my corporate logo).
|
I could do a
table
|
If I wanted to
|
|
But I don’t
want to
|
So I won’t
|
Anyhow, pretty sure that’s not really what you meant to imply, and perhaps I’m just misreading, but just to be clear…because a lot of people who are getting hysterical about Outlook’s HTML support don’t seem to understand it, Outlook 2007 and 2010 *DO* support this level of HTML just great. It’s primarily CSS support that the e-mail marketers (like the guy who founded the so-called “E-mail Standards Project”) are asking for.
Master Plan for E-mail Ad Domination 1
Outlook 2007 and 2010 support all sorts of nifty graphics and charts in e-mail. Of course, very few people actually use charts in e-mail…
By the way, Gmail has pretty shoddy CSS support too. I haven’t seen any “#fixgmail” campaign, interestingly enough. :-)
Best wishes and aloha,
Ben M. Schorr
|