Bugzilla

Henry, the recommended and supported way to send plaintext messages in Thunderbird is to use the HTML composer and then let Thunderbird downconvert the message to plaintext during sending. Plaintext is far more complicated than you would think and *only* the HTML composer gives us sufficient information to send good plaintext. The plaintext composer does not. I know it's ironic and not logical superficially, but there is far far more depth to this question than one realizes at first. Additionally, the HTML composer is also far easier to use for most users. So, the combination of the HTML composer and plaintext downconvert is the better option both for ease of use, and for best plaintext results. This combination is the supported and recommended way to send plaintext, *not* the plaintext composer. The plaintext composer is mainly for people who want to send ASCII-Art or way to play with individual characters in specific ways, so there are some use cases, but it's not fit for most people.

Please see comment 51, where I explained in detail why the HTML composer is needed to send good plaintext. Explaining everything would take a whole chapter of a book.

Henry, the recommended and supported way to send plaintext messages in Thunderbird is to use the HTML composer and then let Thunderbird downconvert the message to plaintext during sending. Plaintext is far more complicated than you would think and *only* the HTML composer gives us sufficient information to send good plaintext. The plaintext composer does not. I know it's ironic and not logical superficially, but there is far far more depth to this question than one realizes at first. Additionally, the HTML composer is also far easier to use for most users. So, the combination of the HTML composer and plaintext downconvert is the better option both for ease of use, and for best plaintext results. This combination is the supported and recommended way to send plaintext, *not* the plaintext composer. The plaintext composer is mainly for people who want to send ASCII-Art or want to play with individual characters in specific ways, so there are some use cases, but it's not fit for most people.

Please see comment 51, where I explained in detail why the HTML composer is needed to send good plaintext. Explaining everything would take a whole chapter of a book.

Henry, the recommended and supported way to send plaintext messages in Thunderbird is to use the HTML composer and then let Thunderbird downconvert the message to plaintext during sending. Plaintext is far more complicated than you would think and *only* the HTML composer gives us sufficient information to send good plaintext. The plaintext composer does not. I know it's ironic and not logical superficially, but there is far far more depth to this question than one realizes at first. Additionally, the HTML composer is also far easier to use for most users. So, the combination of the HTML composer and plaintext downconvert is the better option both for ease of use, and for best plaintext results. This combination is the supported and recommended way to send plaintext, *not* the plaintext composer. The plaintext composer is mainly for people who want to send ASCII-Art or want to play with individual characters in specific ways, so there are some use cases, but it's not fit for most use cases.

Please see comment 51, where I explained in detail why the HTML composer is needed to send good plaintext. Explaining everything would take a whole chapter of a book.