From: Daniel Stenberg (Daniel.Stenberg@sth.frontec.se)
Date: Wed Aug 04 1999 - 01:44:00 CDT
On Tue, 3 Aug 1999, Tom von Alten wrote:
> I am a bit confused about another part of what you wrote, though:
>
> >> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=grab002.JPG
> >
> > It is _not_ meant to be inlined, as the "attachment" keyword suggests
> > otherwise. Not that hypermail actually cares about that
> > keyword at this moment, if I recall correctly.
>
> Wouldn't attached images *always* say disposition = attachment?
No. It could say 'inline' and it actually should do that if that part of the
mail is intended to be shown inlined.
> Hypermail has the useful option of putting images in-line if desired,
> which overrides what makes sense in a mail context, but not necessarily
> in an archival / HTML context. I'd vote to keep this feature as an
> option!
I agree with you about that, I was just pointing out teeny details about the
headers you received as well as trying to bring implementation specifics such
as those into the light so that they can be discussed.
--
Daniel Stenberg - http://www.fts.frontec.se/~dast
ech`echo xiun|tr nu oc|sed 'sx\([sx]\)\([xoi]\)xo un\2\1 is xg'`ol