-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Thomas,
On 14 April 2001 at 13:43:06 +0800 (which was 06:43 where I live)
Thomas wrote to Marck D. Pearlstone on TBUDL and made these points:
MDP>> Of course.
T> Seeing the rest of your message, I believe you mean "of course
T> not", as otherwise I'm unable to contradict you. ;-)
Reading it back, I think you're right. I did mean "Of course not".
MDP>> How can you delete the only part of a message?
T> And if the context type is multipart/alternative or
T> multipart/mixed, deleting part of that message is OK?
Absolutely. You are free to do as you please with a real and actual
attachment.
T> Or if you have a "real" attachment, is that not technically a part
T> of the message?
I mean that if a message is a single entity with no attachments or
parts, there is no "part" that *can* be deleted.
MDP>> As for TB keeping the self generated text approximation of such
MDP>> a message - why should TB betray one of its base fundamentals of
MDP>> not interfering with incoming email?
T> It is generated from text actually in the message, thus the message
T> body is shown (not some "generated text", but the message minus the
T> HTML tags).
"Shown" is the operative word. It isn't stored anywhere. It is just
displayed as a courtesy to allow you to see the text with the tags.
T> So, part of the message is filtered,
That is a leap of faith. Nothing is saved from this filtering
operation - that would constitute an interference.
T> and I want to delete only the part that is not shown.
You may want to, but it doesn't exist in isolation. That's my point.
T> Same idea as when I have a message that was sent as
T> multipart/alternative, the HTML part (text plus tags) is not shown,
T> and I want to delete that part. In the former case it would be
T> betrayal, in the latter it would be fine?
T> Kindly clarify for me.
It would be fine because in the multipart/alternative it is a real and
not an imaginary part and can be separated from the plain text version
of the message and thus the HTML attachment alter-ego can be easily
deleted. Without the multipart/alternative formatting there is *no*
"other" part to leave behind, just a single body full of HTML tags. If
you take away the body of the message all that is left is the headers
- - not sustainable as a message. The plain text *view* of the message
is just that in such a case - a view; it doesn't really exist as an
entity.
While I understand that you're saying that it possibly *could* exist,
/I'm/ saying that making it do so would constitute the kind of
interference that TB shuns. I'm only against it because of that
principle.
Having said that, Douglas Hinds has presented what strikes me as a
very effective work-around for the problem. Have you tried it?
- --
Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Consultant Software Engineer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 6.5.8ckt (build 04)
Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness
iQA/AwUBOtgc1znkJKuSnc2gEQK3JwCgz6xqWpBx8h0ZDsOAOQyJb9dpRUgAnjpW
2HalFTLeB1/74cSTJ3IOwBiL
=siuB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
______________________________________________________
Archives : <http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com>
Moderators : <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
TBTech List: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You are subscribed as : [email protected]
