Re: [PLUG] OT: MIME and messages from Apple Mail

[Toby DiPasquale <toby@cbcg.net>]

On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 10:21:16AM -0500, Jeff Abrahamson wrote:
> I'm not clear why this is the right thing, although I agree with
> everything you said other than that one bit.  If I attach a file that
> is not image/jpeg, say a Word file or a PDF, I wouldn't expect that to
> get slipped into the text/html portion, even though an html browser
> can probably display it.
> 
> There's a context where image/jpeg should be embedded in the
> text/html, say because it's linked.  But there's also a context where
> you're saying, "Here's an attached file."  Why should the latter be
> precluded for image/* attachments?
> 
> (Maybe it is, I'd just like to understand why.)

So the distinction here is indeed between "attached" images (images that
are just along for the ride) and "embedded" images (attached images that
are referred to in the HTML part with a MIME cid). I believe what you
received was an embedded image and was therefore inextricably linked to
the HTML part; it was not an attachment, per se, but rather an integral
part of the entire sub-part. (as the HTML could not properly be rendered
without it)

Had the image been attached instead, it probably would have had a MIME
tree similar to the one you described as receiving before the new rev of
Mail.app.

Ask your friend if he's dragging images into the Message composition
window or if he's explicitly pressing the Attach button at the top of the
pane. This may make a difference but most likely Apple is just attempting
to figure out what the user wants and embedding content into messages when
it knows the MIME type. (i.e. what to do with it)

-- 
Toby DiPasquale
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug