earl wrote:
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Paul Fox wrote:
> If you specify a disposition of
> attachment (which we do), you can't complain about gmail doing what you
> told it.
au contraire. i can certainly complain, which is what i did. and now
we're talking about how to fix it.
Since the disposition was "attachment", it is perfectly acceptable for
an MUA to require you to save to a file instead of displaying inline.
Otherwise, why even have a content-disposition header?
that's a great question. remember, i use mh as my mailer. with that
as my baseline, you can see that i might not understand the detailed
differences between dispositions, since mh pretty much treats them
pretty much all the same: poorly. i assumed gmail would handle them
well, and it turns out it doesn't. (there's no reason gmail couldn't
offer to display many types of attachments.)
i'm just a user. i used the most convenient method of forwarding an
entire mail message that nmh provides -- the method that i've been
encouraged to switch to over writing build directives, and i didn't
get the results i expected. sounds like maybe someone else had a
similar surprise with calendar programs, so i don't seem to be alone.
If your intent is, "display inline if you are able," then the
disposition should have been "inline.". One should not expect an MUA to
rendering an "attachment" disposition inline (an MUA may still do it,
but the sender should not expect it).
pardon me for having higher expectations than i should have.
paul
Any "fix" would be to have your message composed so the disposition is
"inline". I think something like Lyndon's proposal should work.
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf(_at_)foxharp(_dot_)boston(_dot_)ma(_dot_)us (arlington, ma,
where it's 58.3 degrees)
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers