From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/19482 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Automatic part insertion: =?iso-8859-1?q?=E5=E4=F6?= and =?cn-gb-2312?b?s9TExMj7?= on the same line Date: 02 Dec 1998 20:12:57 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <6f67buzzff.fsf@dna.lth.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035157825 11843 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 23:50:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:50:25 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from gizmo.hpc.uh.edu (gizmo.hpc.uh.edu [129.7.102.31]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA03188 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 14:19:46 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@sina.hpc.uh.edu [129.7.3.5]) by gizmo.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA15751; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 13:18:03 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 02 Dec 1998 13:17:49 -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 NAA05926 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 13:17:10 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sparky.gnus.org (ppp075.uio.no [129.240.240.80]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA03098 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 14:16:57 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by sparky.gnus.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id UAA13528; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 20:17:36 +0100 Mail-Copies-To: never X-Now-Reading: Joe Keenan's _Blue Heaven_ X-Now-Playing: Aphex Twin's _On_ Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Vladimir Volovich's message of "02 Dec 1998 15:39:47 +0300" User-Agent: Gnus/5.07006 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.60) XEmacs/21.2(beta3) (Aglaia) X-Face: &w!^oO~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\ writes: > Well, very nice. :-) I take my words back about automatical parts > insertions, _provided_that_ there is an RFC which specifies that some > part should be displayed as a continuation of the line of previous > part (as gnus did when displaying your message). Quoth RFC2046: NOTE: The CRLF preceding the boundary delimiter line is conceptually attached to the boundary so that it is possible to have a part that does not end with a CRLF (line break). Body parts that must be considered to end with line breaks, therefore, must have two CRLFs preceding the boundary delimiter line, the first of which is part of the preceding body part, and the second of which is part of the encapsulation boundary. > Also, gnus should prefer to not create `automagical' mime parts if > it _can_ find a single charset for the whole part. For example, a > message with mixed russian+japanese seems to fit into japanese mime > encoding. So, even if i'm sending this from a cyrillic environment > in Emacs, gnus should prefer to encode the part with the mixed text > using single charset, if available. Thus, when Emacs will support > unicode, gnus will send messages with mixed chinese+scandinavian > text without breaking into parts. I don't really know about this one. If I'm composing a message using Scandianvian and Sami characters (which would be iso-8859-1 and iso-8859-9 if I'm responsing to someone using iso-8859-9,) I want to respons using iso-8859-9 and iso-8859-1, not Unicode, no matter whether Emacs supports it or not. What's important is what the recipient supports, and one can't assume that the recipient supports these megacharsets. MIME is widely implemented, if (ahum) slightly shakily here and there. Unicode is not. So it's better to Mimetilate a message than to Unicodelate the messege. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen