[Irl-dean] An old question from a newbie - plain text email is better?!

[Ross Geoghegan]

Apologies if this is a well-worn (or even tiresome) question...
Is plain text better than HTML for email?
I believe so and below are my reasons.

If anyone has any feedback on this or can point me to a place where this
debate has been argued out (preferably with evidence rather than (my)
conjecture) I would appreciate it.
Thanks in advance, Ross Geoghegan (TCD)
--
Plain text email is better because:

1. Plain text is by far the most universally accessible format for sending
email.

2. HTML emails are dependent on the user having a email client capable of
rendering HTML - otherwise the will receive HTML source code which is a mess
of angle brackets and font attributes and completely inaccessible.

3. Plain text emails are quicker (and cheaper if using a mobile device) to
download and take up less space.

4. The user has more control over the display settings - they can view them
at whatever font size they like and against a coloured background - they are
also not bound to the senders idea of taste!

5. Most modern email clients will recognise a complete web address (URLs)
and make it clickable.
(The exception is files on a shared network drive - but users can copy and
paste a network address (which may contain spaces) into the run command and
access the files in this way)

6. Given the number of viruses and bugs associated with HTML email some
users have choosen to turn HTML off.

In short HTML is for writing webpages Plain Text is for writing Email.