[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject)
From: |
David Levine |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject) |
Date: |
Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:01:02 -0400 |
Ken wrote:
> [David:]
> >The parts are stored in reverse order in the message to make
> >them easier to view with non-MIME-conformant viewers. That is
> >irrelevant to a user of mhlist/mhstore. Why expose it?
>
> I guess it's all about what you mean by "reverse" order.
The same as RFC 2046 ยง5.1.4 means.
> So, why expose it? Well, everywhere else we display the exact MIME
> structure as it exists in the message.
We do here, too.
Maybe my point about non-MIME-conformant viewers isn't
coming through. When using MIME tools, I want the MIME
structure that the tools, such as mhshow, use. When using
less(1), I get what's in the file, but I'm on my own to
impose any kind of structure on it.
> I found the exception for multipart/alternative confusing, and it's
> non-obvious behavior if you know about MIME.
I disagree, especially after seeing the rationale in the RFC.
> I wasn't actually proposing to change just mhlist; what would happen
> would be to simply delete the reverse_parts() function.
Please don't.
> I would have done it back when I first discovered this,
And maybe there's an nmh user out there who's glad you didn't :-)
David
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), David Levine, 2014/08/18
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), David Levine, 2014/08/18
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), David Levine, 2014/08/19
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), David Levine, 2014/08/19
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject),
David Levine <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), David Levine, 2014/08/20
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), David Levine, 2014/08/20