Am 20.11.2013 03:04, schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
> On 19.11.2013 07:29, A.L.E.C wrote: 
>> On 11/19/2013 03:46 PM, Simon Loewenthal wrote:
>>
>>> CONTENT-TRANSFER-ENCODING: 7BIT CONTENT-TYPE: TEXT/PLAIN;
>>> CHARSET=UTF-8 with this CONTENT-TRANSFER-ENCODING: QUOTEABLE-PRINTABLE
>>> CONTENT-TYPE: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=UTF-8 or this if its certain its
>>> only text CONTENT-TRANSFER-ENCODING: 7BIT CONTENT-TYPE: TEXT/PLAIN;
>>> CHARSET=ASCII
>>
>> So, are you saying that a message can't be "described" as 7bit and
>> charset=utf-8 even if it contains only ascii characters? Sounds like
>> bullshit. Maybe it contains some non-printable/malformed chars but I
>> don't see them in the provided sample.
> 
> "7 bit transfer encoding" with "charset UTF-8" is nonsensical, regardless
> of whether or not byte values > 0x7F actually occur in the data.

That is not correct. If a message is qp-encoded, UTF-8 and 7bit can make
perfect sense. But even if the message is NOT qp-encoded and does NOT
contain any hi-bit characters, UTF-8 is still a correct declaration.

Although not a "nice" and "least invasive" declaration, right. But still a
correct one.

I would also prefer if Roundcube would first check if one of the following
charsets would match in this order before blindly declaring UTF-8 (for
Western Europe):

US-ASCII -> ISO-8859-1 -> ISO-8859-15 -> Windows-1252 -> UTF-8

But that doesn't mean that UTF-8 is wrong, if e.g. US-ASCII would match.

> The receiving end is fairly justified in rejecting this and complaining
> loudly. 

No, definitely not. See above.

Cheers,
-- 
Michael Heydekamp
Co-Admin freexp.de
Düsseldorf/Germany
_______________________________________________
Roundcube Users mailing list
users@lists.roundcube.net
http://lists.roundcube.net/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to