On Friday, February 06, 1998 2:08 PM, Mike.Elliott@BULL.NET
> [SMTP:Mike.Elliott@BULL.NET] wrote:
Which doesn't really help in helping who sent the message know that they're
doing it and none of the recent "Worried about GenCon" had any obvious MIME
attachments as such (according to my mail program) the only likely candidate
was a reply with a formatted original message inclusion from Simon
LeRay-Meyer
(close date and time to that above) which had the offending message in the
header properties but it looked OK in my MIME aware mail program, so I'd never
know it was causing a problem.
MIME is a de-facto standard for email communications
so much so that you may not even realise your email program is doing it which
I think is probably happening in this case. If you're stuck with an email
program, through no fault of your own, and it doesn't do MIME then I think you
have to live with it under the axiom "good of the many outweigh the good of
the few"
This doesn't apply to attachments which we all know are EVIL
> On Fri, 6 Feb 1998, Tim Jones wrote:
> MIME is a de-facto standard for email communications
Nota bene, the only time that a MIME email-aware mailer /should/ have
MIME-converted data (as opposed to just straight, readable text) is if
and
only if the data /is/ an attachment (and, as above, is evil and
wasteful).
Such things like HTML-encoded emails and the like are also, as above,
definitively evil. Thus I think we can say definitively in the case above that
its the sender's misconfiguration (if reply text is sent
MIME-encoded) or the sender's willful evil (if they replied in HTML or
put on an attachment) that's the problem, not Mike.
I do note to Mike that both Pine and Elm are MIME-capable these days and
can, if one bothers (I seldom do), decode the MIMEification. Its best,
however, if we never see it at all.
ObGZG: Whatever happened to the FMA Thrust project?
Thnaks Alex, for your helpful comments. The only problem is that I read my
email using Lotus cc:Mail on a PC. Pine & elm are not much use in a
DOS/Win
environment.
We are soon to move to Lotus Notes mail. Does anyone know if that is "MIME
aware"?
Mike Elliott
______________________________ Reply Separator
____________________________
_____
Subject: Re: MIME mail
Author: owner-ftgzg-l@bolton.ac.uk at INTERNET
Date: 06/02/1998 18:36
> On Fri, 6 Feb 1998, Tim Jones wrote:
> MIME is a de-facto standard for email communications
program, through no fault of your own, and it doesn't do MIME then I think you
> have to live with it under the axiom "good of the many outweigh the
Nota bene, the only time that a MIME email-aware mailer /should/ have
MIME-converted data (as opposed to just straight, readable text) is if
and
only if the data /is/ an attachment (and, as above, is evil and
wasteful).
Such things like HTML-encoded emails and the like are also, as above,
definitively evil. Thus I think we can say definitively in the case above that
its the sender's misconfiguration (if reply text is sent
MIME-encoded)
or the sender's willful evil (if they replied in HTML or put on an attachment)
that's the problem, not Mike.
I do note to Mike that both Pine and Elm are MIME-capable these days and
can, if one bothers (I seldom do), decode the MIMEification. Its best,
however, if we never see it at all.
ObGZG: Whatever happened to the FMA Thrust project?
> On Mon, 9 Feb 1998 Mike.Elliott@BULL.NET wrote:
> email using Lotus cc:Mail on a PC. Pine & elm are not much use in a
Actually, both Pine and Elm have DOS versions with character-cell
interfaces.
ObGZG: Hmmmm, FMA Full Thrust. Wish I had time to get back to hacking at it,
or any of the other million projects on my back burners.
> On Mon, 9 Feb 1998 09:11:51 +0000, Mike.Elliott@BULL.NET wrote:
> We are soon to move to Lotus Notes mail. Does anyone know if that is
Yes, most certainly. Lotus Notes 4.0 and above are MIME compliant.
Allan, Thanks for that, I was rather hoping it would be.... Hopefully it won't
be too long before we get it.
Mike
______________________________ Reply Separator