On Sat, 27 Jan 2001 04:38:35 -0500,
"Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2001 02:08:08 -0500 (EST),
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Howard Eisenberger) wrote:
>
> > Since I hardly ever use MIME in practice, I haven't tried to get
> > this to work with different mailreaders. As has been pointed out,
> > Arachne does it "right", although I'm not even sure why image/gif
> > is "right" and application/octet-stream is "wrong", since I can
> > decode the attachment in either case.
>
> This is also another good point. You can easily decode an attachment
> even if the headers misidentify the file type that is encoded. Some
> people get upset about encoders that don't correctly identify the file
> type. To please these folks we should try to do it right. We have to
> cross all our Ts and dot all of our I's to keep all the constables from
> getting after us. It is true that Arachne does it right.
After fooling around with this some more, I think I see why image/gif
is more "right" than application/octet-stream. With the former, your
mailreader can view the attachment. With the latter, it will only
decode it. So far, the only way I have been able to get it "right" is
to use Arachne or to do it manually with mpack, etc.
Howard E.
--
DOS TCP/IP * <URL:http://www.ncf.ca/~ag221/dosppp.html>
