Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The current preview release of Outlook 2010 uses Microsoft Word as the rendering engine for HTML base4d email which only supports a small subset of standards compliant HTML.

The main reasoning from Microsoft is based around using Word as the editor and rendering engine.

Is having HTML email rendered in a standards compliant way important you as an Outlook user, or is this a non issue?

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Tom Wijsman, BinaryMisfit Feb 25 '11 at 23:07

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Forgive my naive viewpoint (not being a web development expert), but wouldn't the world be a better place if ALL HTML rendering engines were Standards Compliant? Is this a hoplessly idealistic and unrealistic dream..? (if anyone thinks that this is a worthwhile question in it's own right, comment to that effect and I'll make it so).

share|improve this answer

Of course it should - it would make the job of developers having to translate annoying marketing emails much less time consuming.

But whether it will or not is up to the whim of those at Microsoft, and since they don't need to do it to sell the product, I guess it's only going to happen if one of the developers happens to spends some extra time on it.

share|improve this answer

Here's the Outlook team's opinion on it and a quote ...

There is no widely-recognized consensus in the industry about what subset of HTML is appropriate for use in e-mail for interoperability.

Personally, I like Word as the editor. I get familiar interface, ease of use and power and give up very little. Remember, they have to deliver a tool you don't need to know any HTML to use.

share|improve this answer
Well they can start by fixing everything that broke between 2003 and 2007. – Peter Boughton Jul 20 '09 at 0:25
Yes, but is IE8 even fully compliant? – JP Alioto Jul 20 '09 at 0:34
This can't be the official opinion surely to everyone it's clear that adding a substandard html editor is contributing to the problem rather than solving it. – svandragt Aug 6 '09 at 14:18

It's not a non-issue.

HTML compliance in email programs is one of the "hidden problems" of HTML compliance. Mass marketers often have headaches handling this because email clients tend to be older and quite a long way behind current browsers. CSS support is often spotty, for instance. This is one reason they often have links that say "If you're having trouble reading this email, follow this link to view it on our web page."

share|improve this answer

It is indeed important to some users because they like to embed HTML content in messages they send.

share|improve this answer

My Outlook is already slow enough, thank you. No need to include a fully standard compliant rendering engine and bloating it up even more. An HTML subset that handles most cases adequately is enough.

Any rendering issues will affect mostly advertising email. I care more about emails that contain only written text and a few attachments, they ususally give me the information that I need for my work.

share|improve this answer

It will no be important for the Outlook user because Outlook is compatible with Outlook. However other mail clients will likely have display issues if the HTML that Word produces is as problematic as it has been in the past.

So if you are an Outlook user that communicates with people that don't use Outlook and you find it important that no part of your mail looks garbled then it should be important to you.

That said perhaps it highlights one of the problems with email and one more reason to move away from it.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .