I wrote:
Rod> The first part of the patch makes the bbdb-extract-field
Rod> function stop at the start of the real message (i.e. past any
Rod> pseudo-headers such as "Archive-name:") instead of at the
Rod> formal start of the message.
Jamie writes:
Jamie> I think this is a bad idea. Lots of people forward
Jamie> messages such that their headers look like this:
Jamie> From: Jamie Zawinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jamie> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Whitby)
Jamie> Subject: fwd
Jamie> From: some weenie
Jamie> To: some other weenie
Jamie> Subject: something else
Jamie> the forwarded message body
Good point. I didn't think of that. I certainly agree that you
shouldn't break BBDB to take into account some other broken behaviour.
I still want to get at that "Archive-name: " pseudo-header, though. I
guess the only way for me to do this is to set fieldval to the message
body when a magic field is named in the auto-notes-alist, and then use
the user-supplied function that I added as the second part of my patch
to extract the relevant part of the fieldval (i.e. extract out the
"Archive-name: " pseudo-header).
Jamie, do you intend to include the second part of the patch in BBDB
distribution (the part that allows the STRING field of the
auto-notes-alist record to be a string, integer or function) ?
If so, I will hack some more on the extract-field function to return
the message body contents when a magic field is requested (is "Body" a
good name for the magic field ? Can you suggest a better name ?).
Is this the way I should go about this ? Anyone have a better way to
get at the message body ?
--
--------------------------------------------- _--_|\ |
Rod Whitby ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) / \ |
Canon Information Systems Research Australia \_.--._/ |
1 Thomas Holt Drive, North Ryde, N.S.W., 2113. v |
