[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject)
From: |
Ken Hornstein |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject) |
Date: |
Thu, 07 Aug 2014 12:50:20 -0400 |
>The RFCs that define MIME say that alternatives parts representing the
>same content, e.g. text/plain, text/rtf, and text/html, shall be in the
>email in order worst to best when judged by their ability to represent
>the content. This allows a user reading the email in an MUA that's not
>MIME-capabable to come across the simplest format first, e.g. text/plain.
Ralph is of course correct, but let me add one nit; nmh (and MH) reverse
the order of multipart/alternative parts internally, so they show up
as the "best" content first. I was going to get rid of this implementation
wart when the MIME code gets retooled.
--Ken
- [Nmh-workers] A non-complaint, norm, 2014/08/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] A non-complaint, Ken Hornstein, 2014/08/06
- [Nmh-workers] (no subject), norm, 2014/08/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), Ralph Corderoy, 2014/08/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), Jerrad Pierce, 2014/08/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), Ralph Corderoy, 2014/08/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject), Paul Fox, 2014/08/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] (no subject),
Ken Hornstein <=
- [Nmh-workers] (no subject), Ken Hornstein, 2014/08/07