On 08/09/2010 03:58 PM, Tim wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 13:18 +, g wrote:
>> not entirely true.
>
> Which bit? You quoted nothing.
true. i did '' more than i intended. yet from below, it seems that
you knew what 'bit' i meant. ;)
> e.g. This is a test is the
> same as a bare This is a
On 08/09/2010 09:39 AM, Tim wrote:
not entirely true.
gmail composed op's email, which has already been shown, without above
tags. only tagging used was "< b r >". [without spacing.]
a few of yahoo emails that i looked at do not contain tags you list.
they did contain more than just "< b r >".
On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 03:12 +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> So you are saying that I can write just a plain text message, label it
> as being html in the header, and the typical mail reader is going to
> pretend that any/all missing html tags are there, and then render and
> display the message as
On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 03:27 +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> Aaahhh, well, so you are saying that an e-mail can contain both plain
> text version and html version of the same message simultaneously?
Yes, that's the main use of multipart/alternative. It means that the
message has multiple parts, an
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 19:35 -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan
> wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps you'd like to propose this reasoned and conciliatory position to
> > the list administrators and propose that the Guidelines be changed.
>
> Conciliatory? N
On 08/09/2010 01:54 AM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>> web pages work with 'html format', email works with 'html code'.
>
> I don't quite understand this. Can you elaborate what exactly is the
> difference?
web pages have an *RFC* compliant format that begins with, or similar;
[spacings added in wo
On 08/09/2010 02:27 AM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> On Monday, August 09, 2010 03:02:43 Tim wrote:
> Aaahhh, well, so you are saying that an e-mail can contain both plain text
> version and html version of the same message simultaneously?
if the email client composer or online email composer is se
On 08/09/2010 01:49 AM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> But it seems this is not what I received. You can look back in this thread
> where I quoted the full OP message, as KMail showed it to me. There was no
> mention of html context, nor any tags for line breaks.
that is because kmail is not _showi
On Monday, August 09, 2010 03:02:43 Tim wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 02:49 +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > But it seems this is not what I received. You can look back in this
> > thread where I quoted the full OP message, as KMail showed it to me.
> > There was no mention of html context, nor a
On Monday, August 09, 2010 00:29:23 Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 15:30 +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > But this is just a declaration. The message doesn't actually contain
> > any html code, AFAICS. Things like , , and other tags.
>
> A HTML message section doesn't actually have to have an
On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 02:49 +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> But it seems this is not what I received. You can look back in this
> thread where I quoted the full OP message, as KMail showed it to me.
> There was no mention of html context, nor any tags for line breaks.
I received the original messa
On Sunday, August 08, 2010 20:53:24 g wrote:
> On 08/08/2010 02:30 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > But this is just a declaration. The message doesn't actually contain any
> > html code, AFAICS. Things like , , and other tags.
>
> there is a difference between 'html code' and 'html format'.
>
> we
On 08/08/2010 06:49 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> On Sunday, August 08, 2010 16:45:55 Mike Klinke wrote:
>> On Sunday 08 August 2010 09:30, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>>> IOW, shouldn't the mail filter (generic one, I'm not talking
>>> specifically about g's mail filter) check the actual contents of
>
On Sunday, August 08, 2010 16:45:55 Mike Klinke wrote:
> On Sunday 08 August 2010 09:30, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > IOW, shouldn't the mail filter (generic one, I'm not talking
> > specifically about g's mail filter) check the actual contents of
> > the message for html stuff, rather than just blin
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan
wrote:
>
> Perhaps you'd like to propose this reasoned and conciliatory position to
> the list administrators and propose that the Guidelines be changed.
Conciliatory? No. Well reasoned? Yes. You just posted 5267
characters (5.14 k) to a few
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 17:37 -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
> > That is true, but HTML mail is a bandwidth waster. I routinely get
> > messages with so much garbage in them that just delete them. This
> is
> > what this filter does, dumps HTML mail before it even gets read. We
> > need to remem
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 15:30 +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> But this is just a declaration. The message doesn't actually contain
> any html code, AFAICS. Things like , , and other tags.
A HTML message section doesn't actually have to have any HTML tags, just
needs to be treated as if it might. i.
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 17:37 -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
> people waste more "bandwidth" than HTML email could ever dream of
> by rehashing this crap every other day
Though, if every mail came through as HTML, and *many* would if nobody
complained, the HTML would become the great bandwidth was
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 1:41 PM, James McKenzie
wrote:
>>
> That is true, but HTML mail is a bandwidth waster. I routinely get
> messages with so much garbage in them that just delete them. This is
> what this filter does, dumps HTML mail before it even gets read. We
> need to remember that the
On 08/08/2010 07:53 PM, g wrote:
> On 08/08/2010 03:56 PM, Sam Sharpe wrote:
>
>
>> one of the arguments against HTML is that it is a waste of other
>> people's bandwidth.
>
> true.
>
>> Much like this discussion thread.
>
> not really. especially if op gains a better understanding and stops
>
On 08/08/2010 04:29 PM, suvayu ali wrote:
> Or am I misunderstanding something?
or something.
--
peace out.
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world without fences, who needs gates.
**
help microsoft stamp out piracy - give linux to a friend today.
**
to mess up a linux box, you need to work at
On 08/08/2010 03:56 PM, Sam Sharpe wrote:
> one of the arguments against HTML is that it is a waste of other
> people's bandwidth.
true.
> Much like this discussion thread.
not really. especially if op gains a better understanding and stops
sending 'html'.
--
peace out.
tc,hago.
g
.
***
On 08/08/2010 03:35 PM, James McKenzie wrote:
> It IMPLIES that there are mulitple parts, one of which can be text/html.
> The filter is picking up the message as HTML,
*not*
the filter is blocking message because of 'Content-Type: t e x t/h t m l'.
there is a difference. :)
--
peace out.
On 08/08/2010 03:17 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> To do that it would need to parse the contents (it's easy to construct a
> message that looks a lot like HTML but isn't, e.g. a plain text message
> discussing HTML syntax).
and why i have filter for 'Content-Type: t e x t/h t m l'
> Way too
On 08/08/2010 02:30 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> But this is just a declaration. The message doesn't actually contain any
> html code, AFAICS. Things like , , and other tags.
there is a difference between 'html code' and 'html format'.
web pages work with 'html format', email works with 'html c
suvayu ali wrote:
> On 8 August 2010 07:30, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>
>> IOW, shouldn't the mail filter (generic one, I'm not talking specifically
>> about
>> g's mail filter) check the actual contents of the message for html stuff,
>> rather
>> than just blindly trust the message header?
>>
>
On 8 August 2010 07:30, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> IOW, shouldn't the mail filter (generic one, I'm not talking specifically
> about
> g's mail filter) check the actual contents of the message for html stuff,
> rather
> than just blindly trust the message header?
>
I don't understand all this fus
> As someone who actually doesn't care much if the mail is HTML or Text,
> can I just point out that one of the arguments against HTML is that it
> is a waste of other people's bandwidth.
>
> Much like this discussion thread.
Yes. Actually I agree with you.
And you too have just contributed to it
As someone who actually doesn't care much if the mail is HTML or Text,
can I just point out that one of the arguments against HTML is that it
is a waste of other people's bandwidth.
Much like this discussion thread.
--
Sam
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or cha
>>> why does a "multipart/mixed" declaration in the header make
>>> it html?
>>
>> It does not.
>>
> It IMPLIES that there are mulitple parts,
Huh? IMPLIES!? Of course multipart IMPLIES multiple-parts. Isn't that
fucking OBVIOUS?
> one of which can be text/html.
Or something else.
> The filte
On Sunday 08 August 2010 09:30, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> IOW, shouldn't the mail filter (generic one, I'm not talking
> specifically about g's mail filter) check the actual contents of
> the message for html stuff, rather than just blindly trust the
> message header?
His original message arrive
Takehiko Abe wrote:
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="===1539751590095400808=="
>>> This is HTML mail. If it were text, this would be text/plain...
>>>
>
> bah. HTML is text too. It's called "text/html", which is not
> "multipart/mixed"
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> On Sunday, August 08, 2010 14:49:27 James McKenzie wrote:
>
>> Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>>
>>> Here is the message with full headers, as KMail sees it (forgive me for
>>> not
>>>
>>> trimming anything):
>>> Subject: Hi
>>> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1rp=E1d_Attila_Bakos
>>> Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
>>>
>>> boundary="===1539751590095400808=="
>>
>> This is HTML mail. If it were text, this would be text/plain...
bah. HTML is text too. It's called "text/html", which is not
"multipart/mixed". They are not related.
> why does a "multipart/mi
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 15:30 +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> IOW, shouldn't the mail filter (generic one, I'm not talking
> specifically about
> g's mail filter) check the actual contents of the message for html
> stuff, rather
> than just blindly trust the message header?
To do that it would nee
On Sunday, August 08, 2010 14:49:27 James McKenzie wrote:
> Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > Here is the message with full headers, as KMail sees it (forgive me for
> > not
> >
> > trimming anything):
> > Subject: Hi
> > From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1rp=E1d_Attila_Bakos?=
>
> He is using the GMail send ag
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>
> Here is the message with full headers, as KMail sees it (forgive me for not
> trimming anything):
>
> Subject: Hi
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1rp=E1d_Attila_Bakos?=
>
He is using the GMail send agent, probably the Web Mail interface. It
creates HTML mail by default.
On Saturday, August 07, 2010 16:47:32 g wrote:
> On 08/07/2010 03:12 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > He didn't send it in html, I received the first post with no problem.
>
> actually, he sent *two* 'text/html'. one to this list, one to FEL list.
>
> > Maybe it got caught by your spam filter or so
On 08/07/2010 03:12 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> He didn't send it in html, I received the first post with no problem.
actually, he sent *two* 'text/html'. one to this list, one to FEL list.
> Maybe it got caught by your spam filter or something.
my spam filter *did not* catch them. it knows b
On Saturday, August 07, 2010 13:07:51 g wrote:
> did not see your original post. maybe it was html and not plain text.
[snip]
> btw, in future, please do not send emails in html. thank you.
He didn't send it in html, I received the first post with no problem. Maybe it
got caught by your spam fil
On 08/07/2010 08:42 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 07/08/10 08:10, Arpad Attila Bakos wrote:
>> Hi!
>> I'm Arpad Attila Bakos, 25 years old guy interested in open-source
>> software and hardware,from Hungary.
>> Working as a repair technician at a world leader mobile phone company
>> I've met a Fedor
On 07/08/10 08:10, Árpád Attila Bakos wrote:
> Hi!
> I'm Arpad Attila Bakos, 25 years old guy interested in open-source
> software and hardware,from Hungary.
> Working as a repair technician at a world leader mobile phone company
> I've met a Fedora ambassador, who adviced me to join FEL.
>
Hi Árp
42 matches
Mail list logo
