MIME->MML

MIME->MML

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Er -- I wrote the darn thing.  'Twas no big deal.  So we should now
have proper MIME (multipart) editing capabilities.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: MIME->MML

[Steinar Bang]

>>>>> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no>:

> Er -- I wrote the darn thing.  'Twas no big deal.  So we should now
> have proper MIME (multipart) editing capabilities.

Does this mean that you also have MIME-style forwarding of messages
now? 

Re: MIME->MML

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no> writes:

> Does this mean that you also have MIME-style forwarding of messages
> now? 

Nope.  :-)  But that should be trivial now -- just put the message to
be forwarded in a buffer and include a tag that includes that
message/rfc822 buffer.

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

Re: MIME->MML

[Hrvoje Niksic]

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

> Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no> writes:
> 
> > Does this mean that you also have MIME-style forwarding of messages
> > now? 
> 
> Nope.  :-)  But that should be trivial now -- just put the message to
> be forwarded in a buffer and include a tag that includes that
> message/rfc822 buffer.

Well, could `S o m' do that for me?  How about `S O m' and MIME
digests?

Re: MIME->MML

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes:

> > Nope.  :-)  But that should be trivial now -- just put the message to
> > be forwarded in a buffer and include a tag that includes that
> > message/rfc822 buffer.
> 
> Well, could `S o m' do that for me?

Yes, that is how `S o m' and `S o f' will work in the future.

> How about `S O m' and MIME digests?

That I'm not so sure about... because I don't know what a MIME digest
is, really.  :-)  rfc-index doesn't look like it mentions it.

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

Re: MIME->MML

[Hrvoje Niksic]

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

> > How about `S O m' and MIME digests?
> 
> That I'm not so sure about... because I don't know what a MIME
> digest is, really.  :-)

Now that you mention it, neither do I.  I was sure MIME defined a form 
of digesting the messages, but I cannot find it now.  I guess you
could create a multipart/mixed body with only message/rfc822 parts,
and hope that the recipient intuits it as a digest, but it would be
stretching.

Re: MIME->MML

[James H. Cloos Jr.]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Lars> That I'm not so sure about... because I don't know what a MIME
Lars> digest is, really.  :-) rfc-index doesn't look like it mentions
Lars> it.

It is in rfc1341.  Main type is multipart/digest, and the default
content-type for each body part is message/rfc822, should an explicit
one be left out.

- -JimC
- -- 
James H. Cloos, Jr.  <http://www.jhcloos.com/cloos/public_key> 1024D/ED7DAEA6 
<cloos@jhcloos.com>     E9E9 F828 61A4 6EA9 0F2B  63E7 997A 9F17 ED7D AEA6

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE2ufQkmXqfF+19rqYRAgecAKCSIpuMjzBVJFnPD6HxecUf/8TiXACbBPEq
9tWwkw5gDH9E45rok91U+sc=
=/TOZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: MIME->MML

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Feb  4, 1999, Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> wrote:

> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>> > How about `S O m' and MIME digests?
>> 
>> That I'm not so sure about... because I don't know what a MIME
>> digest is, really.  :-)

> Now that you mention it, neither do I.  I was sure MIME defined a form 
> of digesting the messages, but I cannot find it now.

RFC 2046, page 26.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva  http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva  aoliva@{acm.org}
oliva@{dcc.unicamp.br,gnu.org,egcs.cygnus.com,samba.org}
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil

Re: MIME->MML

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Alexandre Oliva <oliva@dcc.unicamp.br> writes:

> > Now that you mention it, neither do I.  I was sure MIME defined a form 
> > of digesting the messages, but I cannot find it now.
> 
> RFC 2046, page 26.

Right.  But I think that normal digests are more widely understood
than MIME digests, so I think it's best to have `S O m' still do
normal digests.

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

Re: MIME->MML

[Hrvoje Niksic]

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

> Alexandre Oliva <oliva@dcc.unicamp.br> writes:
> 
> > > Now that you mention it, neither do I.  I was sure MIME defined a form 
> > > of digesting the messages, but I cannot find it now.
> > 
> > RFC 2046, page 26.
> 
> Right.  But I think that normal digests are more widely understood
> than MIME digests, so I think it's best to have `S O m' still do
> normal digests.

Perhaps there should be a variable `gnus-digest-use-mime', defaulting
to nil, which would allow the MIME-lovers among the Gnusers to send
out all-cool all-MIME digests.

Re: MIME->MML

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes:

> Perhaps there should be a variable `gnus-digest-use-mime', defaulting
> to nil, which would allow the MIME-lovers among the Gnusers to send
> out all-cool all-MIME digests.

At some point in the future, perhaps, but I see no need to offer that
now.  As our experiments have shown us, MIME readers are so deficient
that sending out anything more complex than a multipart with one (1)
attachment is not a good idea.  I think if you send someone a MIME
digest, it's not unlikely that they will be completely unable to read
it without saving each and every part to a file first.

And for people who use Gnus, whether it's an RFC934 digest or a MIME
digest is kinda immaterial -- nndoc groks them both.

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

Re: MIME->MML

[Hrvoje Niksic]

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

> And for people who use Gnus, whether it's an RFC934 digest or a MIME
> digest is kinda immaterial -- nndoc groks them both.

This is untrue.  nndoc failed miserably at groking a test MIME digest
I've sent to myself.

Re: MIME->MML

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes:

> > And for people who use Gnus, whether it's an RFC934 digest or a MIME
> > digest is kinda immaterial -- nndoc groks them both.
> 
> This is untrue.  nndoc failed miserably at groking a test MIME digest
> I've sent to myself.

Could you mail me one?

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

Re: MIME->MML

[François Pinard]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii, Size: 2415 bytes --]

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

> Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no> writes:

> > Does this mean that you also have MIME-style forwarding of messages
> > now?

> Nope.  :-)  But that should be trivial now -- just put the message to
> be forwarded in a buffer and include a tag that includes that
> message/rfc822 buffer.

It was an old message, as the `Nope.' is not true anymore.  By the way,
Lars!  Could we have something, I do not know, maybe like `C-u C-c C-a',
that would say `Attach buffer: ' instead of `Attach file: '?  With proper
completion, of course?

In case you are taking votes :-), I like the new effect of `S o m'.
Agreed that Gnus may somewhat try to live with other broken MIME decoders,
but there are limits to the ugliness, and Gnus is not to be responsible of
everything around.  Let users, a bit, pay the price of their (bad) choices.

I find irritating, sometimes, when people feel they have to put on their
own shoulders the problems of everybody around, and then, try to bring me
with them in their descent.  Broken MIME is just an example.

The most common case for me is when French people try to be polite to those
having broken mailers, by emasculating out diacritics.  They are getting
quite impolite to all people for which French is important, and their
commiseration for amorph sites and people seems to step over everything.
The responsibility and duty of the emitter is towards correctness and
good right.  If destruction has to happen, it should be at the receiving
site, and the responsibility of the destruction identified at that point.
The worse happens when the crap is produced at the emitter point: it is then
forced on everybody, good guys included, and is difficult to later repair.

MIME is not a perfect thing, yet in practice nowadays, it is the way to go.
On the other hand, neither Gnus, nor Gnus users, should feel like they
ought to cope, as emitters, with all possible aberrations of Outlook MIME.
Outlook users should share the large part of the problems induced by their
choice.  I much hope that Lars will never dirty my own Gnus screen merely
because Outlook exists.  Lars' mission is not to repair the marriage between
Microsoft and Outlook users.  It pertains to Microsoft to do that :-).

-- 
François Pinard                            mailto:pinard@iro.umontreal.ca
Join the free Translation Project!    http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard

Re: MIME->MML

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

François Pinard <pinard@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> Could we have something, I do not know, maybe like `C-u C-c C-a',
> that would say `Attach buffer: ' instead of `Attach file: '?  With proper
> completion, of course?

Sure.  But I think we probably should have a more extensive range of
MML insertion commands, move them to mml.el and put them on a common
MML keymap.  And then `M-m f' (or whatever) would attach a file,
`M-m b' a buffer, and, er, I'm sure there should be more commands, but 
I can't think of any at the moment.  Uhm.  Oh -- `M-m m' to insert a
multipart, and `M-m p' to insert a part.  `M-m v' to verify that the
MML in the buffer is correct?

But `M-m' is taken, I guess.

> MIME is not a perfect thing, yet in practice nowadays, it is the way to go.

Yes.  I'm quite surprised at how workable MIME is turning out to be.
I mean, MIME may not be pretty or anything, but it can be made to
work, and you can do useful stuff with it.  And I didn't think that
was the case.

It seems that other MIME implemetators haven't really gotten beyond
their natural aversion to the stuff, though.  :-)

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

Re: MIME->MML

[Kai.Grossjohann]

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

  > [...] Oh -- `M-m m' to insert a multipart, and `M-m p' to insert a
  > part. [...]

Yes, yes, yes!  Just like C-c C-e in psgml!  :-)

kai
-- 
I like _\bb_\bo_\bt_\bh kinds of music.

Re: MIME->MML

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes:

>   > [...] Oh -- `M-m m' to insert a multipart, and `M-m p' to insert a
>   > part. [...]
> 
> Yes, yes, yes!  Just like C-c C-e in psgml!  :-)

I've now added mml-mode and stuff to 0.78, but I don't seem to feel
like actually writing these commands just yet.  If someone wants to
give it a whack, 0.78 should be out later today...

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