| Warning! Outlook 2007 Might Trash HTML Again |
So, you think you have ironed out all the kinks in your HTML formatting, now that you've had it tested and validated and checked and rechecked for spam content, bad code and email-client incompatibility? Sorry, it's time to go back to the drawing board again.
Essentially, what's happening is that Outlook 2007 will no longer use Microsoft's Internet Explorer engine to render HTML. Outlook now uses IE to read content in HTML messages and switches over to its sister Office program Word to compose messages. Outlook 2007 no longer uses IE, apparently because some layman users were finding inconsistencies between IE and Word. Instead, it will use an updated version of Word to both render and compose. The issue is that designers are finding problems with the way Word handles, or more accurately doesn't handle, high-function design element such as Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), background images, and rich media. The Real Outlook 2007 Challenge: Creative or Marketing?
When Microsoft announced quietly late in 2006 (via developer articles) that it was replacing IE with Word, email designers flooded industry blogs with protests over the loss of HTML functionality. The greatest howls came from email designers who had evolved attractive, functional messages using CSS. Outlook 2007 will have limited support for CSS. However, email-marketing specialists have been more temperate. They argue that Outlook 2003, which expanded default image blocking and link disabling, was far more damaging to marketing efforts and forced marketers to adapt to the kind of streamlined HTML design that will perform acceptably in Outlook 2007. A Critical Change: Loss of 'Alt' Tags
The most critical loss, however, is something that appears relatively minor: Outlook 2007 will no longer support the use of "alt" tags, which provide a few words of text to describe an image and which appear when the image is disabled. Although it appears minor, this is actually a pretty serious loss of function. Alt tags help give meaning in an email where images are disabled, because you can use the few words of text in the alt tag to either describe the image, the offer it represents or the action you want the reader to take when the image itself doesn't render. Losing that function combined with images disabled by default will hurt email design that relies heavily on images. If that describes your email templates, you will need to rework your templates again. Here are the other functions Outlook 2007 will no longer support:
Unless your ROI reports show conclusively that your program success depends on either having a form embedded in each email message or that an animated image really does drive response or conversions, you should consider lightening up your HTML use to accommodate Outlook 2007 users. Doing this may give you an unexpected bonus as well: Your delivery, open and response rates may go up as well because you'll have fewer elements that will either break in an email client or trigger a spam filter. How to Respond to Outlook 2007 Changes
The new Outlook is scheduled to be released this month (February 2007). It will take time for the new version to migrate from early adopters to the broader audience of general users. Second, if you have already had your HTML formatting audited or validated, or if you have streamlined the design in the last year, you might not have to worry. The Word rendering engine will either read your message just fine or alter it so little as to have almost no impact. And, if you have already reworked your templates to accommodate default image blocking and link disabling as well as preview-pane use, you've done most of the work to manage any damage Outlook 2007 could inflict. How to Counteract Outlook 2007 Changes
Here are five steps you can take to accommodate the reduced functionality expected in Outlook 2007:
In Summary
|



So, you think you have ironed out all the kinks in your HTML formatting, now that you've had it tested and validated and checked and rechecked for spam content, bad code and email-client incompatibility? Sorry, it's time to go back to the drawing board again.



