K9 Mail signatures

[Gary Wood]

I need to add an image to my email signature. Is this possible now, or can I suggest it as a feature to be added, please?

I know it's something that's been requested before by users (going back to 2012), and I also know that some of you will disagree with the idea of adding images! What I want is an option to be able to do it, not to force all users to do so. That way, we can all be happy! ;-)

Thanks very much,

Gary

[pshrutpark]

+1

I have also been looking forward to being able to add an html and/or graphic signature so that my emails are standardised across all platforms.

Thanks.

Regards

[Greg Troxel]

Perhaps if I had an option that would prevent me from ever receiving a
signature with an image it would be ok :-) But seriously, many think
that anything more than a line or two of plain text as a signature is
atrocious (even if all of us have k-9 configured to not load images by
default), and thus I think there is reluctance to enable that sort of
thing.

[Philip Whitehouse]

I don't really think this is the reason. The main issue is that K-9 has had more time put into reading rather than composing emails. In supporting complex signatures we'd also need to be supporting complex email composition. Both mean writing a user interface that's essentially allows you easily compose rich text documents. Doing it well means much of the functionality of an application like Google Docs.

I'm not saying never, but I do think it's easy to understate what this would mean.

Best regards,

Philip Whitehouse

[pshrutpark]

Thank you for your reply and helpful explanation Philip.

So K-9 Mail can read html/rich text emails (and display pics) but can not write then.

Okay.

Regards

[Gary C. Wood]

Thanks for this, Philip.

I do appreciate that allowing rich text of HTML composition would be a significant amount of work (though, I'd argue, a necessary thing to do, given that the competition now has this functionality).

However, a simpler solution would simply be to allow the use if HTML tags in the signature field. It would then be easy to insert images and provide more formatting, for those of us that need this functionality.


--
Sent from my smartphone

[Philip Whitehouse]

On September 14, 2016 8:49:15 AM GMT+01:00, "Gary C. Wood" <w...@garywood.me.uk> wrote:
>Thanks for this, Philip.
>
>I do appreciate that allowing rich text of HTML composition would be a
>significant amount of work (though, I'd argue, a necessary thing to do,
>given that the competition now has this functionality).

The competition is sort of irrelevant. Development is purely on a voluntary basis and priorities set by individuals. Bluntly it will be done when one or more developers dedicate the time to it.

>
>However, a simpler solution would simply be to allow the use if HTML
>tags in the signature field. It would then be easy to insert images and
>provide more formatting, for those of us that need this functionality.

You can't just add HTML tags in the signature and ignore the rest of the message. Either all your paragraphs and new lines would collapse into one blob of text or the tags would just be displayed as text.


Best regards,

Philip Whitehouse

[Kevin Kowalewski]

Well, you could do it like Thunderbird does it. The signature is an external html file... You then don't need to support rich text editing of the message / signature. Its up to the user to include it.

We use an image with embedded data as base64 in our email signatures and it looks great. Huge disappointment k9 does not support this... its 2016 not 2002.

Kevin