Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[Robert Bihlmeyer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 88 bytes --]

Hi,

this is a demonstration. Please read below!

(The last line of the outer message.)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1785 bytes --]

From: Robert Bihlmeyer <e9426626@stud2.tuwien.ac.at>
To: robbe@mars.tuwien.ac.at
Subject: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)
Date: 20 Sep 1999 12:30:02 +0200
Message-ID: <lf3dw9ub85.fsf_-_@mars.zserv.tuwien.ac.at>

Hi,

>>>>> On 16 Sep 1999 14:28:47 -0400
>>>>> dsg@mitre.org (David S. Goldberg) said:

 David> In my case, a message that I forwarded to someone had no
 David> signature on it so that the inlined message/rfc822 part
 David> appeared to the recipient as if I wrote it due to the
 David> placement of my sig in the forward (does that parse?)

Gnus has this problem, too: per default, inline parts have no visual
separation from other inline parts. This is arguably correct for
normal parts, but very wrong for message/rfc822, at least.

The only indication that an inlined (forwarded) message/rfc822 starts
is the sudden appearance of mail headers. There is no indication of
the message's end, whatsoever.

To demonstrate this, this message (sans signature) has been enclosed
in a forward.

(this is the last line of the inner message)

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 191 bytes --]

(we're in the outer message, again)

        Robbe

-- 
Robert Bihlmeyer	reads: Deutsch, English, MIME, Latin-1, NO SPAM!
<robbe@orcus.priv.at>	<http://stud2.tuwien.ac.at/~e9426626/sig.html>

Re: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[Jack Vinson]

>>>>> "Robbe" == Robert Bihlmeyer <e9426626@stud4.tuwien.ac.at> writes:

Robbe> this is a demonstration. Please read below!

I suppose you could turn on whatever variable does the same thing as the
function gnus-summary-display-buttonized ('K b').  This way you will always
see the parts in your messages.  Or you can use
gnus-summary-toggle-display-buttonized ('M-t').  

There must be some variable that one can set in .gnus for this.

-- 
Jack Vinson
Bart: The principal's toupee is not a Frisbee. 

Re: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[Simon Josefsson]

Jack Vinson <vinson@unagi.cis.upenn.edu> writes:

> Robbe> this is a demonstration. Please read below!
> 
> I suppose you could turn on whatever variable does the same thing as the
> function gnus-summary-display-buttonized ('K b').  This way you will always
> see the parts in your messages.  Or you can use
> gnus-summary-toggle-display-buttonized ('M-t').  
> 
> There must be some variable that one can set in .gnus for this.

Yup, `gnus-inhibit-mime-unbuttonizing'.

Re: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[Robert Bihlmeyer]

Hi,

>>>>> On 22 Sep 1999 17:01:20 -0500
>>>>> Jack Vinson <vinson@unagi.cis.upenn.edu> said:

 Jack> I suppose you could turn on whatever variable does the same
 Jack> thing as the function gnus-summary-display-buttonized ('K b').

But I like the unbuttonized look. It's just not appropriate for
message/rfc822 stuff. Could the buttons be enabled just before/after a
such a part?

	Robbe

-- 
Robert Bihlmeyer	reads: Deutsch, English, MIME, Latin-1, NO SPAM!
<robbe@orcus.priv.at>	<http://stud2.tuwien.ac.at/~e9426626/sig.html>

Re: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[François Pinard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1491 bytes --]

Robert Bihlmeyer <e9426626@stud4.tuwien.ac.at> writes:

> per default, inline parts have no visual separation from other inline
> parts.  This is arguably correct for normal parts, but very wrong for
> message/rfc822, at least.

> The only indication that an inlined (forwarded) message/rfc822 starts
> is the sudden appearance of mail headers.

I'm all for the principle than underline should mean clickable, more or less.
I render _underline_ with a yellow background ("seashell1", to be precise),
to simulate what we call a `crayon à souligner' in French (I think English
people say "underlining pen" or "highlighting pen").  Plain bold should not
be abused when avoidable, and I prefer to use background colouring instead.

> this is a demonstration.

These principles are fruitful for cases like in-lined message/rfc822.  I'm
including a picture of your demonstration, below.  For me, it is absolutely
clear that I'm looking at a quoted message.

> There is no indication of the message's end, whatsoever.

Here, you have a point.  I do see a plain:

   (this is the last line of the inner message)
   (we're in the outer message, again)

on my screen.  When the message has signature, which is the usual case,
such problems do not exist, as Gnus uses a pretty characteristic rendering
for signatures.

Maybe that Gnus could invent a mere `-- ' (rendered as a signature) when
rendering a message/rfc822 in a MIME part, which has no recognised signature?

Here is the promised picture:


[-- Attachment #2: demo.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 66912 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 59 bytes --]


-- 
François Pinard   http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard

Re: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[Robert Bihlmeyer]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1383 bytes --]

Hi,

>>>>> On 04 Oct 1999 20:20:36 -0400
>>>>> François Pinard <pinard@iro.umontreal.ca> said:

 FP> These principles are fruitful for cases like in-lined
 FP> message/rfc822. I'm including a picture of your demonstration,
 FP> below. For me, it is absolutely clear that I'm looking at a
 FP> quoted message.

for me, it's not. It could be a colored message body (text/enriched,
text/html). Furthermore, my headers are not colored in all
configurations (think: vt220), so in this cases the message/message
boundary is even more elusive.

 FP> When the message has signature, which is the usual case, such
 FP> problems do not exist, as Gnus uses a pretty characteristic
 FP> rendering for signatures.

Again, not in all configurations. Also, denying the problem for "the
usual case", which is not so usual in my opinion (broken mailers
abound), will not make it go away.

 FP> Maybe that Gnus could invent a mere `-- ' (rendered as a
 FP> signature) when rendering a message/rfc822 in a MIME part, which
 FP> has no recognised signature?

That could be a solution. But is it workable in most configurations?

 FP> Here is the promised picture:

FWIW, I don't consider sending messages > 500 lines without asking
first good etiquette.

	Robbe

-- 
Robert Bihlmeyer	reads: Deutsch, English, MIME, Latin-1, NO SPAM!
<robbe@orcus.priv.at>	<http://stud2.tuwien.ac.at/~e9426626/sig.html>

Re: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[François Pinard]

Robert Bihlmeyer <e9426626@stud4.tuwien.ac.at> écrit:

> >>>>> On 04 Oct 1999 20:20:36 -0400
> >>>>> François Pinard <pinard@iro.umontreal.ca> said:

>  FP> These principles are fruitful for cases like in-lined
>  FP> message/rfc822. I'm including a picture of your demonstration,
>  FP> below. For me, it is absolutely clear that I'm looking at a
>  FP> quoted message.

> for me, it's not. It could be a colored message body (text/enriched,
> text/html).

Tss, tss...  You might not be playing honest, here.  For that matter,
whatever aspect you decide as being clear enough, one could generate some
enriched text that would look exactly like it.  It is extremely unlikely,
besides someone making practical jokes, that I would receive a message
that would just happen to look like a quoted message, in the picture you saw.

> Also, denying the problem for "the usual case", which is not so usual
> in my opinion (broken mailers abound), will not make it go away.

Quite agreed.  This is why Gnus is so tunable and adaptable.  Gnus should
model its usual behaviour after the most usual cases (yet within reason,
of course).  Tuning and customisation exist for the less usual cases.

>  FP> Maybe that Gnus could invent a mere `-- ' (rendered as a
>  FP> signature) when rendering a message/rfc822 in a MIME part, which
>  FP> has no recognised signature?

> That could be a solution.  But is it workable in most configurations?

Yes, in my feelings, but this proves nothing. :-) If it sounds reasonable
to most people, and to Lars as well, maybe he will adopt it?

>  FP> Here is the promised picture:

> FWIW, I don't consider sending messages > 500 lines without asking
> first good etiquette.

The ding list is for discussing about news and messages, by people
interested in such matters, participating in a development effort.
Asking permission before sending a message, given the time a poll would
take, and the discussions around it, would easily generate more volume
than the message itself, not to say how inefficient and counter-productive
the whole thing would be.  I do not feel I exaggerated in that situation,
at least in the context of the ding list.  I had something to show you,
and I merely used the methods Gnus gives me to do so, and the message
was aimed to people using similar tools.  My impression is that it is OK.
And a few Kbs are not inordinate.  We are far from speaking Megs, here :-).

Of course, I could establish an Internet connection, move files around onto
some FTP site, etc., but that's a lot of burden for a straight and simple
thing.  I would rather abstain than to go through that hassle.  In any case,
if there is a consensus I did wrong, just tell me, and I'll adjust.

-- 
François Pinard   http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard

Re: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Robert Bihlmeyer <e9426626@stud4.tuwien.ac.at> writes:

> But I like the unbuttonized look. It's just not appropriate for
> message/rfc822 stuff. Could the buttons be enabled just before/after a
> such a part?

Hm.  Buttons for some parts but not for others?  I don't know...

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

Re: Display of inline messag/rfc822 (aka MIME forwards)

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

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

> >  FP> Maybe that Gnus could invent a mere `-- ' (rendered as a
> >  FP> signature) when rendering a message/rfc822 in a MIME part, which
> >  FP> has no recognised signature?
> 
> > That could be a solution.  But is it workable in most configurations?
> 
> Yes, in my feelings, but this proves nothing. :-) If it sounds reasonable
> to most people, and to Lars as well, maybe he will adopt it?

I sometimes get a bit confused myself as to where message/rfc822 parts
end, so inserting a delimiter of some sort at the end is probably a
good idea.  I'm never confused as to where the part start, though, so
I don't think having anything at the beginning is necessary.

> I had something to show you,
> and I merely used the methods Gnus gives me to do so, and the message
> was aimed to people using similar tools.  My impression is that it is OK.
> And a few Kbs are not inordinate.  We are far from speaking Megs, here :-).
> 
> Of course, I could establish an Internet connection, move files around onto
> some FTP site, etc., but that's a lot of burden for a straight and simple
> thing.  I would rather abstain than to go through that hassle.  In any case,
> if there is a consensus I did wrong, just tell me, and I'll adjust.

I don't mind, but, then again, I have a quite nice connection to the
net now.  

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