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-----