Who Sets the Standard? Email Newsletters Could Fail the "Test"

The buzz word "standards" may cause anthey are compatible with Home Café and other
eyeball-rolling response, but without standards, webrewers such as the Senseo and Melitta.I don't like
would have to buy specific media to work with ourFolgers, period. So would Black and Decker rather me
DVD, VCR and music player. Remember thenot buy its product because I dislike its partners' pod
software buying days, when you had to look forbrands, or buy it because I can use it with other
compatibility in terms of Mac versus Windows?standard pods? That's why standards play an
Imagine having to do that with Web pages. Thisimportant role. They benefit all companies.Does this
Web page is for Macs only ... this one is for Windows.mean a company can't get creative? Not at all. Home
Thanks to W3.org, a body that setsCafé, Melitta and Senseo look different. Two
recommendations for HyperText Markup Languageonly brew one cup at a time while one can do two
(HTML) and other markup languages, we don't havecups. The set up and usage are also different. The
that issue.Some sites, however, do look better inlook and feel are distinctive. I've heard comments
Internet Explorer than in Mozilla or Firefox. That'sfrom people who prefer one brewer over another. If
because such sites use an Internet Explorer-specificall single pod brewers work with any pod brand, then
markup language that is not standard. Let me explain.we have a choice based on which best meets our
Let's say the dreaded blink element is proprietary toneeds, just like with the standard coffee machines.
Internet Explorer only (it's not, but this is just anSome love their Bunn. Some love their Braun. Some
example). If an HTML page has it, and you try tolove their Krups.Cars are the same way. The
view it in a browser other than Internet Explorer,distinctive features, look and style separate one car
nothing blinks on the page (not that we would wantfrom the others. But most of them run on unleaded
it to). This is a very simple example of what happensgasoline. Imagine if we still produced cars using leaded
when a browser maker creates proprietary elementsfuel.Standards for newslettersSo what about
that works only with its browser.Playing well withnewsletters? Before sending this newsletter to you,
othersCreating proprietary markup code is much likewe test it. Not in terms of beating it up and throwing
DVD makers producing hardware that works onlyit around like in the gorilla and suitcase commercials.
with a specific brand of DVDs. On one hand, it mayOr running it into the wall with crash test dummies to
encourage people to buy their DVD products. On thetest its safety.Instead, we check for spammability as
other hand, customers refuse to buy something thatwell as readability. How clean (or not) is the
has such limits. Which would you rather have? Anewsletter? Will it pass through the filters? Such a
customer buying your product because it works withcheck looks at the fonts used, words and the
everything, not just item A, or a customer notmarkup code you don't see unless you do a "view
buying your product at all because it works only withsource."Once while doing a test on a newsletter, we
item A, which is also your product?That's the kind ofreceived a warning that it had "shouting markup."
thing we're seeing with those popular single-cupWow. Not only do we have people who shout by
brewers. I have a Home Café, which I receivedcapitalizing their text in email messages or instant
so I could review the product. The instructionsmessages, but we also have markup that yells. And
explicitly say to use only Folgers or Millstone podsapparently, it's a bad thing in terms of filters.When I
with the machine because using other brands willwrite about Web design, I encourage using XHTML
damage it. Yet, if you look at pods from ormarkup standards with CSS for layout.
Starbucks, companies that don't produce a machine,