At 11:10 -0600 02-06-20, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
or are you talking about intermixing quoted text with reply text
(as I'm doing here), but with individual MIME parts for each
chunk of quoted text and reply?
If the former, it hasn't been accepted because it almost always
presents the quoted text in a useless manner. Appending a large
blob like that doesn't give any context to the reply, and without
the context, the quoted text serves no useful purpose.
The Plan 9 MUA (the one built on acme) appends the message being
replied to as a message/rfc822, and IMO doing so is just a waste of
disk space and bandwidth.
The advantage with separating the quoted text as a separate
body part is that you can send it exactly as is, not cut
in your own way. It also allows digital seals and signatures,
but digital seals and signatures are also something the
market does not seem to want.
References between a reply and the text it replies to could
be done by references into the body of the quoted text,
but that is maybe a too complex solution for a task done
simpler as it is done today.
--
Jacob Palme <jpalme(_at_)dsv(_dot_)su(_dot_)se> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/jpalme/