[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Yann Hodique
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 19:08:03 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux)

>>>>> "Eric" == Eric Schulte <address@hidden> writes:

> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden> writes:
>> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:
>>> > We don't want to bother with MIME for short snippets.
>>> Then what do you think your MUA is there for?
>> The support for embedding small snippets via MIME is dicey in some mail
>> readers, last time I looked.  They present(ed) the first textual part as
>> the only visible text, and presented the rest as attachments.

> To contribute to the bikeshedding [1], I've composed an example email in
> gnus with inline Org-mode-syntax code, inline mime-annotated code, and
> attached (disposition=inline) code.  The results as displayed by gnus,
> gmail and gmx are shown [2].  I don't know if gnus should limit itself
> based on the limitations of non-standards-compliant commercial software,
> but at the least it would seem that while the mime approach /should/ be
> the most portable it will in fact not be portable to many (maybe most)
> other MUAs.

Note that it's the reason why my initial proposal was based on inline
multipart alternative. Providing a MIME fallback that any MUA should
recognize (such as text/plain) should increase vastly the chances of
proper formatting. At least GMail behaves "correctly" when the
text/plain alternative is provided.


We do what we must.  Friendship and loyalty be damned.  We do what we must!

her personal journals

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]