Is there any difference between how HTML Emails and HTML Email Signatures are made?

userH1N61 0
Viewed 40

For me this could just be a bit of nuance paranoia but is there any difference between how HTML Emails and HTML Email Signatures are created and/or rendered? Specifically, after doing some research I keep seeing HTML Email results coming up when I ask for HTML Email Signatures. Some search results do include signature.

From the research I've compiled I've seen that it's best to create HTML Email Signatures with the legacy layout method using the <table> element (Mainly to support Outlook), then I see it mentioned and used a lot less often that you can also use <div> for more flexibility with other email clients for both mobile and desktop and then also the use of "Ghost Tables" in combination with <div> to add support for Outlook and get the flexibility for other email clients.

For just HTML Emails the use of <div> is mentioned often and encouraged for flexibility across different email clients for desktop and mobile and <table> element is also mentioned often as a legacy way of laying out HTML Emails along with the use of "Ghost Tables" and <div>.

So I guess another way to ask this question is. Can the same code convention for HTML Emails (Use of <div> and <table>) be used to make HTML Email Signatures? Is there any code difference or can the same code be used for both?

html-email email css html
1 Answers

When sending HTML emails, you send email X, and Outlook renders X one way, and Gmail renders X a different way. Outlook renders it according to it's largely print-based rendering engine (MS Word), and Gmail renders the same nice HTML according to it's largely web-based rendering engine. So everyone is happy, because Gmail doesn't care how much Outlook botched it. The render happens after sending.

But when setting up HTML email signatures, and if we use Outlook, the signature gets rendered according to Outlook's rendering engine before sending. Thus, you cannot send a responsive signature from Outlook (I'm pretty sure).

However, Gmail's tool to insert signatures is also relatively poor quality, and doesn't support <style> blocks, for example. Therefore it can be hard (but not impossible) to produce something responsive.

It ultimately depends on the quality of the editor used, as well as what the program subsequently does to it to 'clean' your code, as to what works (so, there is no exact answer for this question, sorry--may be why you've been downvoted). Usually, sending from a proper ESP is a lot smoother.

useryowB0
Related