Hello. Does anyone have any idea why sqwebmail is UTF-8/I18N encoding the subject line, just because I put a single = sign in it?
See message below for why this is causing me problems. Thanks... -- Stephen Warren, Software Engineer, Parama Networks, San Jose, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wwwdotorg.org/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason R. Mastaler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Stephen Warren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 10:26 PM Subject: Re: tmda-ofmipd that'll run under tcpserver > On Mon, 18 Aug 2003, Stephen Warren wrote: > > > OK. I've tracked down the source of the failures using X-TMDA in the > > subject line via sqwebmail. > > > > If I type "X-TMDA dated=5d" into the subject line, this gets sent to > > sendit.sh (and hence tmda-sendmail/tmda-inject) as "Subject: > > =?utf-8?Q?dated=3D10d?=" - I guess sqwebmail is seeing the = in the > > message and escaping things out so it won't clash with the = for > > marking it UTF-8. So, TMDA is thinking I want to use the explicit > > address "=?utf-8?Q?dated=3D10d?=" > > > > So, the question is - is this an issue in TMDA because it isn't > > parsing/decoding the UTF-8 encoded data, or shouldn't sqwebmail be > > doing this encoding in the first place? Votes? :-) > > I don't think either package is technically in the wrong here. I > didn't intend for the X_TMDA_IN_SUBJECT feature to support I18N, but > that doesn't mean we can't change this. > > I'll look into this as a future enhancement, as we should have the > tools in TMDA to do it. Basically, we'd need to grok the encoding > used, then decode the entire Subject string, then perform the X-TMDA > stripping, and then re-encode the Subject string sans 'X-TMDA foo'. > > One thing to consider in the meantime however, is why sqwebmail is > encoding the Subject string with UTF-8 when it's not necessary. Most > MUAs do this only on demand, which is probably why this issue has > never arisen before.
