Content-type: text/plain

Content-type: text/plain

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

The MML code doesn't usually insert the default content type because
that would be kinda redundant.  But more importantly, it makes the
MIME look uglier than it has to, which I think is kinda yucky.  There
are people out there still living in caves without a MIME-capable mail
reader, and we should keep things as nice as possible for them.

The only problem is that Microsoft Outlook doesn't understand MIME
standards, so it gets all confused by parts that don't have a
Content-Type header.

So the question is: Insert or not?  Do or dump?
 
-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: Content-type: text/plain

[Wes Hardaker]

>>>>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 02:35:50 +0200, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@quimbies.gnus.org> said:

Lars> The only problem is that Microsoft Outlook doesn't understand
Lars> MIME standards, so it gets all confused by parts that don't have
Lars> a Content-Type header.

Lars> So the question is: Insert or not?  Do or dump?

sigh...  I'd say you need to be helpful to broken mailers, as much as
it seems wrong to.  The goal of a mail reader should be to increase
interoperability as much as possible, even if that means more pain for
yourself.

I'd suspect that there are also many more outlook users than there are
non-mime-understanding mail readers, so optimizing for the later seems
a bit odd considering its one simple and easily skippable line for the
human eyes.

-- 
"In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap,
 and much more difficult to find."  -- Terry Pratchett

Re: Content-type: text/plain

[Simon Josefsson]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@quimbies.gnus.org> writes:

> The MML code doesn't usually insert the default content type because
> that would be kinda redundant.  But more importantly, it makes the
> MIME look uglier than it has to, which I think is kinda yucky.  There
> are people out there still living in caves without a MIME-capable mail
> reader, and we should keep things as nice as possible for them.
>
> The only problem is that Microsoft Outlook doesn't understand MIME
> standards, so it gets all confused by parts that don't have a
> Content-Type header.
>
> So the question is: Insert or not?  Do or dump?

Exactly what happens in Outlook when a part doesn't have a
Content-Type header?

Is there a suitable variable for these kind of workarounds?  E.g.,
(add-to-list 'mml-workarounds 'always-add-content-type).  IMHO, it
should be customizable regardless of what the default is.

Re: Content-type: text/plain

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> Exactly what happens in Outlook when a part doesn't have a
> Content-Type header?
>
> Is there a suitable variable for these kind of workarounds?  E.g.,
> (add-to-list 'mml-workarounds 'always-add-content-type).  IMHO, it
> should be customizable regardless of what the default is.

Since people don't seem to be complaining much, I vote for pretending
that we don't know that there's any problem in this area.

Missing Content-type?  What missing Content-type?

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen