Colored Backgrounds

[Steve Lamb]

Saturday, December 11, 1999, 11:34:29 AM, Trevor wrote:
> BTW, the one reason I think HTML might be good for email is to
> emphasize words. I have always gotten around this by *highlighting*
> words with asterisks but that's clumsy. I would glady accept 60 extra
> bytes per message for the ability to use bold or underline or
> italics. But again, I want the HTML done efficiently.

    Did you know in GNUS (based on emacs) when you view a message that is
*bolded* it shows up bold.  And if you want /italics/ it shows them up in
italics.  Can you imagine what _underlining_ might look like in normal ASCII.

    Oh, wait, I did just show you.  And to think, it gets the point across in
ASCII with no loss and is something that ASCII users do /all/ the time.  I'd
much prefer editors adopting that then HTML.

    Just for comparison.

<B>Bold</B>
*Bold*
<I>Italics</I>
/Italics/
<U>Underline</U> (???)
_Underline_

-- 
         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
         ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------