Re: Kolab 3.0: Mime Message Storage

Christian Mollekopf <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.kde.devel.kolab,gmane.comp.kde.kolab.devel
Organization Kolab Systems AG
Message-ID <1377419.eGLvW6iveX@myhost2>
On Friday 18 May 2012 08.11:33 Aleksander Machniak wrote:
> On 05/17/2012 11:25 PM, Christian Mollekopf wrote:
> >> First the encoding of the attachment is restricted to quoted-printable,
> >> then the encoding of the XML attachment itself is set to utf-8.
> >> 
> >> Honestly, mail clients require some level of compatibility already,
> >> including a variety of encodings, such as iso-8859-1 or what is it
> >> again, and it doesn't really seem impossible to just allow "whatever is
> >> most convenient for the client writing it out".
> >> 
> >> That is to say, libkolabmime / libkolab could of course just only ever
> >> writing out quoted-printable. That's not the problem. I just think it's
> >> best to not restrict what anything else might write out and have
> >> libkolabmime / libkolab act accordingly upon reading the MIME attachment
> >> - even though part of the exercise is to have "our clients" use
> >> libkolab*.
> > 
> > My point is, that if we allow *any* encoding, we have to support *any*
> > encoding in libkolab, and so does every other kolab client, which is in
> > fact impossible, unless there are some restrictions on the allowed
> > encodings in the MIME RFC. Given that a kolab client needs to make that
> > decision anyways (in which encoding to write out the xml), I don't see
> > why it couldn't just use quoted-printable, unless the given platform
> > would indeed lack an
> > implementation of quoted-printable and implementing it would be too
> > cumbersome, which is unlikely given its simplicity. So overall I just see
> > allowing multiple encodings complicating matters without any benefits in
> > return.
> > 
> > I do see your argument about using utf-8 for the xml and then using quoted
> > printable to encode it again. We can allow utf-8 and quoted printable, if
> > you think it's worth the extra effort, but I'm really not in favor of
> > allowing just everything, because that just means we have to implement
> > every encoding some client implements because we don't comply to our own
> > spec otherwise.
> There are three possibilities for mail messages: base64,
> quoted-printable and 8bit. I think all recent mail clients support them.
> I don't see a need to require any specific encoding type for kolab objects.

While that may be a de-facto standard, I couldn't find any specificaiton stating 
this. I am ok with defining those three encodings as the available encodings 
for our MIME message format, but I still think we should define them.
Also IMO every additional encoding raises the implementation efforts for a new 
client, so we shouldn't be unecessarily loose.

Cheers,
Christian

_______________________________________________
Kolab-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.intevation.de/mailman/listinfo/kolab-devel
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 198 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAk+2uIkACgkQF4TVOOpldAAyqQCg0zyZCgrXPN5UJY5AvX0H4e2J
jgsAn0XA794DBZNW/p0WSYejZwKB11Ea
=IVvh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.