Ed Levinson <elevinso(_at_)Accurate(_dot_)COM> writes
Jacob's example:
1 Content-Type: Multipart/related
1.1 Content-Type: Multipart/alternative
1.1.1 Content-Type: Text/plain
Content-Description: plain text version for those who
cannot read HTML
1.1.2 Content-Type: Text/HTML
Content-Description: HTML version of the same message,
which many contain external file references,
as shown in the example which follows on the next line
...
Reversing Releated and Alternative (using access-cid)
1 Content-type: Multipart/Alternative
1.1 Content-type: Multipart/Related; type=text/html
1.1.1 Content-Type: Text/plain
Content-Description: plain text version for those who
cannot read HTML
1.1.2 Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type=content-id;
Content-ID: <1(_dot_)3(_at_)accurate(_dot_)com>
Content-type: Image/GIF
1.2 Content-type: Multipart/Related; type=text/plain
Question: Why not use a variant of the first of the two examples
above, which looks like this:
1 Content-Type: Multipart/related; type=text/html
1.1 Content-Type: Multipart/alternative
1.1.1 Content-Type: Text/plain
Content-Description: plain text version for those who
cannot read HTML
1.1.2 Content-Type: Text/HTML
Content-Description: HTML version of the same message,
which many contain external file references,
as shown in the example which follows on the next line
Rationale: A mailer which understands
"Content-Type: Multipart/related; type=text/html
will also always understand
Content-Type: Text/HTML
and will thus always anyway resolve the multipart/Alternative with
the HTML variant.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacob Palme <jpalme(_at_)dsv(_dot_)su(_dot_)se> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/~jpalme