In <4281711962(_dot_)940584582(_at_)p2(_dot_)jck(_dot_)com> John C Klensin
<klensin(_at_)mci(_dot_)net> writes:
But, Paul, you can't tell a "real attachment" from some other
sort of body part in any fashion other than heuristically.
"Content-type: text/plain" is a plausible heuristic, but there
are many cases where that heuristic fails. For example, if I
wanted to attach (note that word creeping in) all of RFC 2046 to
this message, I would hope that it would be treated as an
attachment and displayed on request at the recipient end, not
just folded into the text.
Sure, but I would expect you to declare Content-Disposition: file in that
case.
Also, if a message arrives as
text
image
image
text
text
it is at least as likely, a priori, that the sender expected it
to be displayed in exactly that order, or even with the images
next to the first text part, as that
I think I would expect all the parts to be displayed in order, with the
text portions inline (assuming the Content-Disposition did not say
otherwise) and with the images represented as icons, which you could click
on to see the pictures if you wished.
So when displaying a part we respect the sender's wishes, if
they don't put in a final line break then we don't either.
Seems sensible. How do you respect whatever wishes the sender
was trying to express when she sent
text/plain
text/plain
Indeed. Presumably the sender had some intention in doing it that way. So
I would expect to see some indication (a separator line, or something).
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Web:
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Voice/Fax: +44 161 437 4506 Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5