On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:16, <ra...@hep.wisc.edu> wrote: > > > > >> So, I have some thoughts in this direction, but I'm wondering: > what do > > > >> you want out of repl in terms of better MIME handling? > > > > > > > >All the "text" parts turned into UTF-8 and quoted would be a good > start. > > > >I can then trim down in vi as normal. > > > > > > Yeah, to me that would make things 100% better. That's also on my > > > to-do list. I think when I start thinking about better UTF-8 support > > > then this will be an obvious benefit. > > > > > > I wouldn't mind some better intelligence in terms of picking out the > > > "good" MIME parts in the reply message, but I'm thinking that's a > longer > > > term goal. > > > > right. for instance, if there's no text part (argh!), probably > > converting an html part to text and using that would be the next step. > > +1 > > and also, when there's multipart/alternative choose text/plain over e.g. > text/html. > > The problem with that approach is that sometimes the text part just says ``There is no text part, use an HTML capable mail reader''. I'm seeing more of them these days.
In mh-e we use the content that is being displayed to the user when we reply. If no content is displayed we do not include the original post. Otherwise we let the user figure out which content is most useful and include that in the reply. Would there be some way to figure this out by caching the details of the last show command which indicates which part was displayed (text or html)? Thanks Jeff -- Jeffrey C. Honig <j...@honig.net> http://www.honig.net/jch GnuPG ID:14E29E13 <http://www.honig.net/jch/key.shtml>
_______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
