> If a user only wants to send out only plain text, they can deselect "Compose messages in HTML format" in their account settings. The HTML composer does something very different from the sending format. It changes the composer UI and behavior to that of (essentially) notepad.exe. In contrast, the HTML composer can do much easier interleaving quotes, and has many other features that the plaintext editor does not have. Still, some section of users want to send only plaintext, even though they like the comfortable editor features. To use an illustration: Even if source code is saved as text files, you still don't edit the source code in notepad.exe, but you use an editor that helps you. So, this configuration (HTML/rich/featureful composer, sending plaintext) gave users that, and they want to keep it. > I feel like a "PlainText" value would only cause problems for a user Users who choose this option know *exactly* what they are doing. Remember that this is *the* classic flamewar in email. Everybody has a slightly different opinion on it, which makes sense to them, and is logical to them, and that's fine. That's why we need the preference. It's easy to underestimate how strong and diverse the opinions are on this point. The current configuration (including having this preference) works very well for a large array of our users with different opinions.
Bug 1727493 Comment 17 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
> If a user only wants to send out only plain text, they can deselect "Compose messages in HTML format" in their account settings. The plaintext composer does something very different from the sending format. It changes the composer UI and behavior to that of (essentially) notepad.exe. In contrast, the HTML composer can do much easier interleaving quotes, and has many other features that the plaintext editor does not have. Still, some section of users want to send only plaintext, even though they like the comfortable editor features. To use an illustration: Even if source code is saved as text files, you still don't edit the source code in notepad.exe, but you use an editor that helps you. So, this configuration (HTML/rich/featureful composer, sending plaintext) gave users that, and they want to keep it. > I feel like a "PlainText" value would only cause problems for a user Users who choose this option know *exactly* what they are doing. Remember that this is *the* classic flamewar in email. Everybody has a slightly different opinion on it, which makes sense to them, and is logical to them, and that's fine. That's why we need the preference. It's easy to underestimate how strong and diverse the opinions are on this point. The current configuration (including having this preference) works very well for a large array of our users with different opinions.
> If a user only wants to send out only plain text, they can deselect "Compose messages in HTML format" in their account settings. The plaintext composer does something very different from the sending format. It changes the composer UI and behavior to that of (essentially) notepad.exe. In contrast, the HTML composer can do much easier interleaving quotes, and has many other features that the plaintext editor does not have. Some section of users want to send only plaintext, even though they like the comfortable editor features. To use an illustration: Even if source code is saved as text files, you still don't edit the source code in notepad.exe, but you use an editor that helps you. So, this configuration (HTML/rich/featureful composer, sending plaintext) gave users that, and they want to keep it, even if they are sending plaintext. > I feel like a "PlainText" value would only cause problems for a user Users who choose this option know *exactly* what they are doing. Remember that this is *the* classic flamewar in email. Everybody has a slightly different opinion on it, which makes sense to them, and is logical to them, and that's fine. That's why we need the preference. It's easy to underestimate how strong and diverse the opinions are on this point. The current configuration (including having this preference) works very well for a large array of our users with different opinions.
> If a user only wants to send out only plain text, they can deselect "Compose messages in HTML format" in their account settings. The plaintext composer does something very different from the sending format. It changes the composer UI and behavior to that of (essentially) notepad.exe. In contrast, the HTML composer can do much easier interleaving quotes, and has many other features that the plaintext editor does not have. Some section of users want to send only plaintext, even though they like the comfortable editor features. To use an illustration: Even if source code is saved as text files, you still don't edit the source code in notepad.exe, but you use an editor that helps you. So, this configuration (HTML/rich/featureful composer, but sending plaintext) gave users that, and they want to keep it, even if they are sending plaintext. > I feel like a "PlainText" value would only cause problems for a user Users who choose this option know *exactly* what they are doing. Remember that this is *the* classic flamewar in email. Everybody has a slightly different opinion on it, which makes sense to them, and is logical to them, and that's fine. That's why we need the preference. It's easy to underestimate how strong and diverse the opinions are on this point. The current configuration (including having this preference) works very well for a large array of our users with different opinions.
> If a user only wants to send out only plain text, they can deselect "Compose messages in HTML format" in their account settings. The plaintext composer does something very different from the sending format. It changes the composer UI and behavior to that of (essentially) notepad.exe. In contrast, the HTML composer can do much easier interleaving quotes, and has many other features that the plaintext editor does not have. Some section of users want to send only plaintext, even though they like the comfortable editor features. To use an illustration: Even if source code is saved as text files, you still don't edit the source code in notepad.exe, but you use an editor that helps you. So, this configuration (HTML/rich/featureful composer, but sending plaintext) gave users that, and they want to keep it, even if they are sending plaintext. > I feel like a "PlainText" value would only cause problems for a user Users who choose this option know *exactly* what they are doing. Remember that this is *the* classic flamewar in email. Everybody has a slightly different opinion on it, which makes sense to them, and is logical to them, and that's fine. That's why we need the preference. It's easy to underestimate how strong and diverse the opinions are on this point. The current configuration (including having this one sending format preference) works very well for a large array of our users with different opinions.