[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach

From: David Levine
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Conflict between "mime" command and attach
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2013 11:33:41 -0500

> >Why wouldn't that be reasonable?  The logic would be simpler:
> >
> >In WhatNow?
> >
> >- If you run "mime", run mhbuild on the draft.
> >- If you "attach", add the appropriate mhbuild directive.  Do not do
> >  this if there is a MIME-Version header.
> >
> >In post(8):
> >
> >- Run "mhbuild -auto -nodirectives".
> The problem here is that if you use -nodirectives, then the
> directives that attach put in the draft wouldn't be executed.

I think it'd be worth trying to solve that.  Could we look for
false mhbuild directives and escape them if not already escaped?
Then we wouldn't need to default to -nodirectives.  Directives
are arcane enough that I think collisions with non-directive
text are unlikely.  But maybe those who have been using them for
the last decade should comment on that :-)

> Ralph said:
> >It would also mean I could "attach", then "edit" to look at it, perhaps
> >embellish, then "mime" to process it, then "edit" again to check things
> >over before I "send"
> You can do this now; if you attach, you can edit the draft and adjust the
> pseudo-header that attach adds.

It's not the pseudo-header, it's the mhbuild directives.  "attach"
users can't view/modify them now.  This would be a benefit, and
though I have cured myself of the urge to look at them, I would if
I could.

> The problem with using mhbuild directives is that it creates special
> semantics for the message body; specifically, you can't have lines that
> start with '#' without special escaping.  That's fine for people who
> want to do that, but I think it's a poor solution for the average user.

If we're going to address that, I think we should step back and
consider whether some other approach would make sense.  I don't
think adding more directive types just to simplify the user
interface is a good idea.

> I was thinking of a special #attach directive that used the same logic
> as "attach"; instead of:
> #image/jpeg {attachment} /tmp/foo.jpg
> You'd just have:
> #attach /tmp/foo.jpg
> To provide an easier-to-use MIME experience that covers the common case.

At the cost of arcane-ness, which would increase the likelihood
of confusion of text with an mhbuild directive.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]