HTML help
-
@IRJ said:
P.S. Our standardized email signature has been great. Its so nice to make changes on the server for everyone at once. We even have everyone's Title, email address, extension, fax, etc. generated from AD.
I honestly hate images in signatures. Wastes space. even more so if someone prints it.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
@IRJ said:
P.S. Our standardized email signature has been great. Its so nice to make changes on the server for everyone at once. We even have everyone's Title, email address, extension, fax, etc. generated from AD.
NTG has a client that has a program that does that as well.
I did mine via HTML as a rule in Exchange. Once you populate everything in AD, it works great.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@IRJ said:
P.S. Our standardized email signature has been great. Its so nice to make changes on the server for everyone at once. We even have everyone's Title, email address, extension, fax, etc. generated from AD.
I honestly hate images in signatures. Wastes space. even more so if someone prints it.
You can't tell Management that, though.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@IRJ said:
P.S. Our standardized email signature has been great. Its so nice to make changes on the server for everyone at once. We even have everyone's Title, email address, extension, fax, etc. generated from AD.
I honestly hate images in signatures. Wastes space. even more so if someone prints it.
The reason I hate it is that when you send emails to open tickets in any system, it attaches the image from every email sent as an attachment to the case...UGH!
-
I tried my best to implement text signatures, but that didn't fly.
-
@IRJ said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@IRJ said:
P.S. Our standardized email signature has been great. Its so nice to make changes on the server for everyone at once. We even have everyone's Title, email address, extension, fax, etc. generated from AD.
I honestly hate images in signatures. Wastes space. even more so if someone prints it.
You can't tell Management that, though.
I do. It turns off potential customers. Lots of people (in my limited experience) find that stuff rude because it means you aren't being considerate of the recipient and aren't actually thinking about what you are doing. Rarely do they work and mostly look bad anyway. Lots of negatives, very little potential positive.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@IRJ said:
P.S. Our standardized email signature has been great. Its so nice to make changes on the server for everyone at once. We even have everyone's Title, email address, extension, fax, etc. generated from AD.
I honestly hate images in signatures. Wastes space. even more so if someone prints it.
You can't tell Management that, though.
I do. It turns off potential customers. Lots of people (in my limited experience) find that stuff rude because it means you aren't being considerate of the recipient and aren't actually thinking about what you are doing. Rarely do they work and mostly look bad anyway. Lots of negatives, very little potential positive.
I agree. I tried to fight that battle, but was quickly turned away and told to use images. Especially when mobile emails are text only.
-
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@IRJ said:
P.S. Our standardized email signature has been great. Its so nice to make changes on the server for everyone at once. We even have everyone's Title, email address, extension, fax, etc. generated from AD.
I honestly hate images in signatures. Wastes space. even more so if someone prints it.
You can't tell Management that, though.
I do. It turns off potential customers. Lots of people (in my limited experience) find that stuff rude because it means you aren't being considerate of the recipient and aren't actually thinking about what you are doing. Rarely do they work and mostly look bad anyway. Lots of negatives, very little potential positive.
I agree. I tried to fight that battle, but was quickly turned away and told to use images. Especially when mobile emails are text only.
Did you talk in terms of negative PR and lost revenue?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@IRJ said:
P.S. Our standardized email signature has been great. Its so nice to make changes on the server for everyone at once. We even have everyone's Title, email address, extension, fax, etc. generated from AD.
I honestly hate images in signatures. Wastes space. even more so if someone prints it.
You can't tell Management that, though.
I do. It turns off potential customers. Lots of people (in my limited experience) find that stuff rude because it means you aren't being considerate of the recipient and aren't actually thinking about what you are doing. Rarely do they work and mostly look bad anyway. Lots of negatives, very little potential positive.
I agree. I tried to fight that battle, but was quickly turned away and told to use images. Especially when mobile emails are text only.
Did you talk in terms of negative PR and lost revenue?
Not in this particular instance, but I mentioned that the majority of users are using mobile devices and it looks horrible to get images when using text email.
-
@IRJ said:
Not in this particular instance, but I mentioned that the majority of users are using mobile devices and it looks horrible to get images when using text email.
Not much of a fight in that case, then.
-
This post is deleted! -
How do you know that something is wrong with the code? What is happening when you render the page?
-
Did the browser throw any error?
-
@Reid-Cooper said:
How do you know that something is wrong with the code? What is happening when you render the page?
Someones late to the party
-
@Reid-Cooper said:
How do you know that something is wrong with the code? What is happening when you render the page?
@thecreativeone91 found the issue. It just needed http:// on the URL
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
did you try mine? you need http:// for it to be complaint.
Finally, can't believe it took 13 posts before someone noticed it! I thought I was going to get to answer it, damn you creativeone!
But yes, AJ, that has to be it, considering if protocol is not included, it's automatically considered a subdirectory on the foreign host.
-
@tonyshowoff said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
did you try mine? you need http:// for it to be complaint.
Finally, can't believe it took 13 posts before someone noticed it! I thought I was going to get to answer it, damn you creativeone!
But yes, AJ, that has to be it, considering if protocol is not included, it's automatically considered a subdirectory on the foreign host.
Yeah, I would have noticed it given time. Most threads like this are a process of elimination. That's just what I saw first.
