On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 04:13:50PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
> > To summarize, if your text (and I do read my mail via mutt with ssh
> > often) email client can read the format, and present it to you without
> > hassle, why reject it?
>
> because its a security risk i don't want? because all it will do is
> let me see more spam?
>
> > The pdf and rtf tools can probably distill those formats into text
> > also, and if so that should be acceptable.
>
> why should i waste time converting bloated formats into text when the
> message should have been text in the first place. use the simplest
> format for the given task, email is plain text: Deal with it.
well of course there is the other issue that according to the mail and mime
rfcs (admittedly I have not looked at the new ones yet, I refer to 821, 822
etc) from memory, email with other formats, such as html or whatever, should
have as the first mime part of a multipart messsage the text version of the
email (or the last part, cant remmebr for sure), basically if there is a non
text version being sent, there should also be a text version, for clients that
cant handle non text versions (and they do exist, deal with it)
Most email software obeys this standard, the stuff that doesnt is outlook and
hotmail, both Ms decisions, they seem to enjoy ignoring standards as people
well know, or subverting them.
See You
Steve
--
sjh@wibble.net http://wibble.net/~sjh/
Look Up In The Sky
Is it a bird? No
Is it a plane? No
Is it a small blue banana?
YES