Re: [Nmh-workers] Attach and disposition

[Lyndon Nerenberg]

> kind of by definition.  what client MUAs _do_ with those attachments
> is a question of semantics.  and what gmail did (i.e., nothing) surprised
> me.

RFC 2183 is unambigious:

2.1  The Inline Disposition Type

   A bodypart should be marked `inline' if it is intended to be
   displayed automatically upon display of the message.  Inline
   bodyparts should be presented in the order in which they occur,
   subject to the normal semantics of multipart messages.

2.2  The Attachment Disposition Type

   Bodyparts can be designated `attachment' to indicate that they are
   separate from the main body of the mail message, and that their
   display should not be automatic, but contingent upon some further
   action of the user.  The MUA might instead present the user of a
   bitmap terminal with an iconic representation of the attachments, or,
   on character terminals, with a list of attachments from which the
   user could select for viewing or storage.

Well naturally an MUA can do what it bloody well pleases.  A well designed 
MUA will implement the intent of the underlying standards, in the 
interests of interoperability.  If MUAs ignore the disposition parameter, 
the functionality becomes useless.

> au contraire.  i can certainly complain, which is what i did.

You can complain, but it doesn't make you right.

--lyndon