On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:01:42 -0400, "R. David Murray" <rdmur...@bitdance.com> wrote: > On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:56:36 +0900, "Stephen J. Turnbull" > <step...@xemacs.org> wrote: > > R. David Murray writes: > > > I can understand the structure Glen found in Applemail: > > > a series of text/plain parts interspersed with image/jpg, with all parts > > > after the first being marked 'Contentent-Disposition: inline'. Any MUA > > > that can display text and images *ought* to handle that correctly and > > > produce the expected result. But that isn't what your structure above > > > would produce. If you did: > > > > > > multipart/related > > > multipart/alternative > > > text/html > > > text/plain > > > image/png > > > text/plain > > > image/png > > > text/plain > > > > > > and only referred to the png parts in the text/html part and marked all > > > the parts as 'inline' (even though that is irrelevant in the text/html > > > related case), an MUA that *knew* about this technique *could* display it > > > "correctly", but an MUA that is just following the standards most > > > likely won't. > > > > OK, I see that now. It requires non-MIME information about the > > treatment of the root entity by the implementation. On the other > > hand, it shouldn't *hurt*. RFC 2387 explicitly specifies that at > > least some parts of a contained multipart/related part should be able > > to refer to entities related via the containing multipart/related. > > Since it does not mention *any* restrictions on contained root > > entities, I take it that it implicitly specifies that any contained > > multipart may make such references. But I suspect it's not > > implemented by most MUAs. I'll have to test. > > OK, I see what you are driving at now. Whether or not it works is > dependent on whether or not typical MUAs handle a multipart/related with > a text/plain root part by treating it as if it were a multipart/mixed
I meant "a text/plain root part *inside* a multipart/alternative", which is what you said, I just didn't understand it at first :) Although I wonder how many GUI MUAs do the fallback to multipart/mixed with just a normal text/plain root part, too. I would expect a text-only MUA would, since it has no other way to display a multipart/related...but a graphical MUA might just assume that there will always be an html part in a multipart/related. > with inline or attachment sub-parts. So yes, whether or not we should > support and/or document this technique very much depends on whether or > not typical MUAs do so. I will, needless to say, be very interested in > the results of your research :) > > --David > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/rdmurray%40bitdance.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com