Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 2 Sep 1998 17:49:15 -0500 (CDT)
From:      Joel Ray Holveck <joelh@gnu.org>
To:        grog@lemis.com
Cc:        green@unixhelp.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: E-day problems: rtld-elf dlsym() broken?
Message-ID:  <199809022249.RAA06393@detlev.UUCP>
In-Reply-To: <19980902160634.G606@freebie.lemis.com> (message from Greg Lehey on Wed, 2 Sep 1998 16:06:34 %2B0930)
References:  <Pine.BSD.4.00.9809010729170.18315-200000@feldman.dyn.ml.org> <199809020322.WAA03118@detlev.UUCP> <19980902160634.G606@freebie.lemis.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Guys, can we *please* start sending code snippets as plain text?  MIME
>> attachments are fine, just don't use base64.  I will usually give code
>> in plain text in a message a once-over, but it's more of a hassle to
>> do so in base64.
> Can't pine autodecode base64 transparently?

I don't know.  Most MUAs that I've used handle text/* like anything
else-- as an attachment.  I can read MIME attachments fine, but it's
extra work that, after a long day of work, makes the difference
between me reading an attachment and hitting 'd'.

Granted, it's not much work to decode it to another buffer.  But let's
consider Jordan's Theorem: If users outnumber the programmers 1000:1,
then it's worth a programmer 1000 minutes to code something that will
save each user 1 minute.

> It seems to me that we should agree on some base set of functionality
> that a reasonable mailer should support.

It would be nice, but it really seems more like it goes the other way
around.  Decide what your audience is likely to support, and use it.

> 1.  MIME

MIME is the only real machine-readable standard for attachments,
except the '---- cut here ----' convention (which wasn't frequently
supported by MUAs anyway).  Since non-conforming MUAs can read it
fine, call it necessary if you're making attachments.

> 2.  base 64

Almost necessary if you're attaching binaries.  (The alternative,
uuencode, is probably less supported nowdays if sent as a MIME
attachment, but I don't know.)

> 3.  8 bit code

No.  This chokes MTAs.  Every time I send a message with Soren's name
written in 8-bit, I get about 9 or 10 MTA bounce messages.  Most MUAs
will not choke on it, thankfully.

> 4.  html

IBWNI..., but it's a lot of cybercrud that's usually unnecessary.  I
haven't seen one html-formatted message that actually got benefit from
being in html.  Usually it's used by people using MS Outlook who
assume it's universal.  And, if at all possible, have a text/plain
alternative.

> 5.  PostScript

No.  Too many tty's still.  (I consider this part of 'images',
although it seems less supported than your common rasters.)

> 6.  RTF (can anybody decipher it?)

You mean M$'s RTF that Outlook prefers, or RFC-1563's text/enriched
that Emacs supports?

> 7.  images

Only when necessary.  But since images to a list are usually rude (I
mean impolite to send, not tasteless in content), then let's say that
it is normally good to coordinate with the other party.

Best,
joelh

-- 
Joel Ray Holveck - joelh@gnu.org - http://www.wp.com/piquan
   Fourth law of programming:
   Anything that can go wrong wi
sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809022249.RAA06393>