In <E92FBCA6-2B5A-11D8-97F7-000393DB5366(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> Keith
Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
I guess it depends on what you mean by "fire up an editor". I wasn't
aware that "most" MUAs these days used external programs to do message
editing.
Yes, I think "fire up editors" got lost in the rush for "plug and play
software" that forces you to use the built-in (and usually woefully
inadequate) editor.
In that case things would work better if the MUA could detect whether
the user chose to change any of these fields that were initialized from
header fields that contained encoded-words, and if no changes were
made, to use the original (encoded) field text. For address fields,
you'd want to do this on a per-address, rather than per-field basis.
Indeed, but I doubt that many currently take that trouble. They have to
decode the field in order to display it. The easy way out is to reencode
it before sending. If it is a Subject starting with "Re: ", they might
well try to include the "Re: " inside the encoding. Even (especially) if
it was a "Re: " they had added themselves. Somebody needs to tell them
that would be a Bad Thing.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk 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