On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 10:24:32PM -0600, William Robb wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Francis"
> Subject: Re: This mail has an attachment: was: PUG again
>
>
> >
> > The part circled in red is an artifact of your email program,
> > which chooses to display a signature block separated from the
> > body of the email message by a grey line.
>
> Makes sense to me.
> I do wonder why only about one message in a thousand displays it and gets
> flagged as carrying an attachment though.
>
> William Robb
It's hard to tell without seeing the headers of the original message
(before the list software propagated it out to the list, changing
several of the headers in the process). As I said, it probably
depends on some of the MIME headers. If asked to guess, I'd look
first at the Content-Disposition: header, and see if it's set to
attachment/inline (which is what some email programs seem to use if
they are quoting an original message as part of a reply, especially
if the original message is in a non-standard character set); this
displays as if the body text is inline, but in fact it's half-way
between inline body text and an attachment. I wouldn't be all that
surprised to find that in those circumstances the list software uses
another attachment for the signature block.
This would only show up sporadically because:
o It would have to come from someone using an email program
that uses attachment/inline
o It would have to be a reply or followup, not an original post
o The post being replied to would have to use an extended
character set, and one that was not the default on the
machine generating the reply.
But this is only a guess (albeit a fairly educated one). The real
reasons may be different in detail, even if somewhat similar overall.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
