I used to think email should be plain text. I ranted at technical people that sent rich text or HTML email.
Then I realized I was being an idiot, and they were right.
Here's how I came to that realization. Imagine an alternate reality where computing developed almost the same as it did in ours, except for one key difference. They did not develop email--it just never occurred to anyone. They have Internet. They have FTP. They have the web. They have instant messaging. They have Facebook. They just don't have email. They still do their correspondence on paper, sent through the post office.
They, of course, use computers to write their mail. They then print it, and mail the printout. They think nothing of including inline photos, bold headings, embedding charts, and so on. If they need to send a lot of data with a mail, they drop a thumb drive or a memory card into the envelope.
When the recipient receives the mail, there is a good chance they scan it, OCR it, and store it in their computer, as that is more convenient than dealing with physical sheets of paper.
Now someone has the bright idea of skipping the "print/mail/scan" and instead using the Internet to transport the content. Does anyone think they are going to toss in a requirement that their new "email" system only can handle plain text? Of course not. They are going to try to make it as capable as the regular "print/mail/scan" mail system, and so are going to support inline graphics and photos, multiple typefaces and fonts, bold, underling, strikeout, color, and all that jazz.
The difference between that alternate reality and ours is that the people that got the bright idea for email in our reality got it at a time when most computer terminals couldn't handle more than simple plain text. The recipient was going to be reading on a teletype or, if lucky, on a video terminal that was effectively a glass teletype.
Those technical limitations have been long gone. There is simply no reason to keep email less functional than paper mail now that we are not forced to do so.
Then I realized I was being an idiot, and they were right.
Here's how I came to that realization. Imagine an alternate reality where computing developed almost the same as it did in ours, except for one key difference. They did not develop email--it just never occurred to anyone. They have Internet. They have FTP. They have the web. They have instant messaging. They have Facebook. They just don't have email. They still do their correspondence on paper, sent through the post office.
They, of course, use computers to write their mail. They then print it, and mail the printout. They think nothing of including inline photos, bold headings, embedding charts, and so on. If they need to send a lot of data with a mail, they drop a thumb drive or a memory card into the envelope.
When the recipient receives the mail, there is a good chance they scan it, OCR it, and store it in their computer, as that is more convenient than dealing with physical sheets of paper.
Now someone has the bright idea of skipping the "print/mail/scan" and instead using the Internet to transport the content. Does anyone think they are going to toss in a requirement that their new "email" system only can handle plain text? Of course not. They are going to try to make it as capable as the regular "print/mail/scan" mail system, and so are going to support inline graphics and photos, multiple typefaces and fonts, bold, underling, strikeout, color, and all that jazz.
The difference between that alternate reality and ours is that the people that got the bright idea for email in our reality got it at a time when most computer terminals couldn't handle more than simple plain text. The recipient was going to be reading on a teletype or, if lucky, on a video terminal that was effectively a glass teletype.
Those technical limitations have been long gone. There is simply no reason to keep email less functional than paper mail now that we are not forced to do so.