On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Roger H. Goun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> * Decode BASE64 or quoted-printable to 7-bit clean plain text
>> This should be decode to 8-bit clean plain text.
> Nope. Not if you're talking strict RFC-821/822 compliance. The
> specs say ASCII. ASCII is properly
> ... It could
> be we simply have some vocal Luddites (hell, I'm usually one of that
> group), and most other people are perfectly happy with this radical
> new stuff from circa 1988. Or maybe everybody here thinks HTML mail
> is ugly, promulgated by Microsoft and AOL, and an evil waste of time
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 10:58 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > New company and new email system here.
>
> Yah... in your mail headers, I saw that you were now using Lotus
> Notes. You have my sympathies.
>
There's somethi
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 10:58 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> New company and new email system here.
Yah... in your mail headers, I saw that you were now using Lotus
Notes. You have my sympathies.
> Sorry to have caused such trouble.
I don't think it's fair to say you did, at least not wit
Sorry to have caused such trouble. New company and new email system here.
The defaults are html. (Like most modern email systems.) My intent is
to keep it simple. Let me know if I didn't get it right this time.
-Bruce
>
> The original sender may well have sent using quoted-printable o
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 5:49 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What do we think about standardizing the transfer encoding types used
> for messages sent to this list?
The original sender may well have sent using quoted-printable or
something else. Mailman automatically converts everything that i
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 14:13:01 -0400
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
>
> SSBoYXZlIGEgc3dpdGNoIGJldHdlZW4gdGhlIHR3byBjb21wdXRlcnMgSSBhbSB0cnlpbmcgdG8g
> aW50ZXJjb25uZWN0LiBUaGUgDQpyZW1vdGUgY29tcHV0ZXIgY29tZXMgdX