[Top] [All Lists]

Will the real uuencode please stand up?

1994-12-18 19:49:58
I'm looking for a little guidance from other MIME implementors in regards
to uuencode.  I am quite familiar with the reasons why uuencode is persona
non grata in this working group, so there's no need to point them out yet
again.  However, I still need to support this vile habit for reasons of
backwards compatibility with older non-MIME software, yet hopefully make
it easy for MIME implementations that understand uuencode to automatically
pick out the data and decode it.

I am aware of some software that sets the Content-Transfer-Encoding line
to reflect the use of uuencode, and that Clarinet uses a multipart/alternative
trick on its images (I don't get Clarinet here BTW).  What I want to know
is what value or values people are typically using.

So, what is the collective wisdom on the *cough* "correct" CTE value
to use when sending a MIME message containing uuencoded data?  What will
maximise my interoperability with other software out there that also supports
this vile habit?  On the reading side, my software is ultra-paranoid and
understands all of the following (if I've missed any, let me know):

        uuencode, uudecode, x-uuencode, x-uudecode,
        uue, uud, x-uue, x-uud

Rest assured that users of my software will not be able to send a uuencoded
body part until they fill out twenty forms in triplicate and after the
software gives them a stern warning about the evils of uuencode. :-)


Rhys Weatherley, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
E-mail: rhys(_at_)fit(_dot_)qut(_dot_)edu(_dot_)au  "net.maturity is knowing 
when NOT to followup"