From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/19901 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Hrvoje Niksic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Mime-Version and no Content-Type Date: 16 Dec 1998 17:39:18 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035158166 13957 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 23:56:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from karazm.math.uh.edu (karazm.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.1]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA23718 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:40:01 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by karazm.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAB25837; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:39:53 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:39:58 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA04361 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:39:48 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from jagor.srce.hr (hniksic@jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA23689 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:39:31 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from hniksic@localhost) by jagor.srce.hr (8.9.0/8.9.0) id RAA19074; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 17:39:18 +0100 (MET) Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Attribution: Hrvoje X-Face: &{dT~)Pu6V<0y?>3p$;@vh\`C7xB~A0T-J%Og)J,@-1%q6Q+, gs<-9M#&`I8cJp2b1{vPE|~+JE+gx;a7%BG{}nY^ehK1"q#rG O,Rn1A_Cy%t]V=Brv7h writes: > >>>>> Karl Kleinpaste : > > > Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: > >> ...should have neither of these headers actually included, since > >> they are the default values and carry no information. (But I'm > >> unable to see where RFC2045 says this right now -- did I imagine it?) > > > Not exactly. I don't recall it in 2045 specifically, but it is > > definitely present elsewhere, e.g., in Spencer's son-of-1036. > > I most violently disagree with son-of-1036 in this respect, and think > the CT and CTE headers should always be present. Then you also disagree with rfc2045? Here is the quote Lars doesn't recall: 5.2. Content-Type Defaults Default RFC 822 messages without a MIME Content-Type header are taken by this protocol to be plain text in the US-ASCII character set, which can be explicitly specified as: Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii This default is assumed if no Content-Type header field is specified. It is also recommend that this default be assumed when a syntactically invalid Content-Type header field is encountered. In the presence of a MIME-Version header field and the absence of any Content-Type header field, a receiving User Agent can also assume that plain US-ASCII text was the sender's intent. (...) So, when SoR1036 says: Headers that merely state defaults explicitly (e.g., a Fol- lowup-To header with the same content as the Newsgroups header, or a MIME Content-Type header with contents "text/plain; charset=us-ascii") or state information that reading agents can typically determine easily themselves (e.g. the length of the body in octets) are redundant, con- veying no information whatsoever. ...it is in accordance with rfc2045.