That sounds great! I made a mistake. Based on what spammers are using, �x65; is not valid but e is. There can be extra zeros: e
I really don't like the names body, rawbody, and text. They are most confusing. Can we please deprecate them in favor of new terms? -Dave * Just an fyi... In 3.0.0, the URI list will contain the "raw" (as listed * in the message) and "cooked" (decode things that don't need encoding, * encode things that need encoding, etc) ... So you can easily catch stuff * like the above. :) I don't think we currently support all the encoding * methods above though... Definitely the %## version, and &\####; ... * * Is &\#0x####; valid? * * > Full -> Raw (as this really is the 'raw' message) * > Rawbody -> Decoded or RawDecoded (if this were just like the 'raw' messag= * e, but with decoded parts) * > Body -> Text (just to make it more explicit that this is the text from th= * e message) * * In 3.0.0: * * body -> Text -- fully decoded and HTML rendered into text * rawbody -> Text -- fully decoded, but not rendered * full -> Raw -- the pristine message as passed to SA
