At 4:41 PM -0600 3/11/98, Dan Kohn wrote:
If you want to send RTF that is not meant for interpreted display (in
order to get the new-line cononicalization and charset definition), why
not use text/rtf with "Content-Disposition: attachment"?
a) Content-disposition is advisory only; mailers are free to ignore it.
b) Part of the definition of the text type is that it be useful to display
to humans without interpretation. The fact that the user has to take an
extra step to display it doesn't make this any more true than it was when
the display was immediately inline.
The right way to send "hairy" rtf would be something like application/rtf
(assuming it existed). Goodness only knows what "hairy" means, of course.