Paul F. wrote: > david wrote: > > Paul F. wrote: > > > > > as an aside, i actually think "the sender's ranking" is a > > > highly overrated, and possibly even obsolete concept these > > > days, RFCs notwithstanding. > > > > I'm not sure about that. My phone seems to handle it > > (multipart/alternative) nicely. > > and nmh does (or could) too, right now, if we were all willing to > hand html mail to our browsers for display. but most of would > prefer to see text/plain over text/html,
mhn.defaults, by default, prefers text/html over text/plain. You know that you can override that, right? > or perhaps even choose which based on sender. That's messier with mhn.defaults and/or the profile, but still doable. > i'd like to see that made easier than it is > now, because while its nice to know what the "sender" would prefer > me to look at, that preference can be difficult for me to > accomodate. > > > > > On the other hand, I have been getting emails with text/html and > > text/plain in a multipart/related. But those two text parts > > appear to be just different representations of the same content, > > so they really should be in a multipart/alternative. I had been > > thinking that these are mistakes. But now I wonder if that's the > > sender's way of punting the choice to the recipient. > > does it matter? again, this suggests that we need better mechanisms > for choosing among alternative mime parts in ways that are somewhat > independent of the sender's supposed preference. In this case, the sender isn't indicating a preference. So mhshow shows all the alternatives. I find that annoying, but at least it's easy to avoid. David _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
