Re: MIME part header
Frank Ellermann <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.rfc822 |
|---|---|
| Organization | <URL:http://purl.net/xyzzy> |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Bruce Lilly wrote: >> For a plain text US-ASCII part you generally need no header >> fields at all (for the default inline disposition). > There is no such thing as "default inline disposition". > A MIME-part has inline disposition if and only if it contains > a Content-Disposition MIME-part header field specifying > inline disposition. I'd consider a MUA not displaying US-ASCII text/plain as plain text as broken, YMMV. >| a sender who goes to the trouble of producing a >| Content-Disposition header with a new disposition type is >| more likely aiming for something more elaborate than inline >| presentation. Yes, you'd need a Content-Disposition: attachment if you don't want the normal behaviour for "no Content header field at all". > a MIME-part with no corresponding Content-Disposition > header field does not have semantics of "attachment", > regardless of what 'KANA Response' and some other MUAs may > label them. +100 (factor 100 for "KANA", I recall that from the SWEN-times before MyDoom) Frank