Thanks. You did a great job of explaining it. Now if the developers
would just fix the bug part.
Thursday, July 11, 2002, 1:00:57 PM, Thomas wrote:
> Hello Gene,
> On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 12:29:27 -0400 GMT (11/07/02, 23:29 +0700 GMT),
> Gene Gough wrote:
GG>> Perhaps this is not the same problem but it looks like it to me.
> Actually, no, it isn't. Technically these are two different things.
GG>> Perhaps I have it totally confused and if so, I am sorry but the only
GG>> way we work these things out is to discuss them. Thanks.
> I agree and will try to explain:
> What you are referring to are attachments (imbedded objects in an HTML
> mail) that were actually sent with the email. They are referenced
> locally, of you look at the source code. Therefore, when you receive
> the email, TB will show them. Once you forward these attachments, the
> names are being changed but the reference within the HTML code is not.
> Therefore, they are not being shown when you open the forwarded mail.
> This has been critisised as a bug, and I am inclined to agree to that
> assessment.
> The other problem is when the object is not sent with the email. It is
> not referenced locally, but the reference points to a URL somewhere in
> the www. TB will not GET (this is the technical term for downloading
> in this case) the object; this is not a bug but by design. If you look
> at the source code of the email, you see that the address of that
> object is not on your computer.
> If this is still not clear, I cannot explain it any better, and maybe
> someone else needs to chip in.
--
Gene mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Windows 2000 [version 5.0.2195]
Mail Client: THE BAT 1.61
IBM Retired Marietta, GA 30064-5428
_________________________________________________________
Archives : http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bugs/Wishes: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
