Re: Curiose encoding...
Hi Rocco!
On Friday, June 9, 2006 at 13:25:56 +0000, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> mutt already has quite a number of features to be more robust against
> standard-violating input
Yes: Standards should not go against users, I'd say.
> So it's a feature request to make mutt use the same alias mapping
> table for RfC2047-encoded words if it doesn't find a valid MIME
> character set name as a last chance.
Wait: This seems to me a little over complicated, side to simply
accepting dot. And let's see user benefit and drawbacks:
· Headers with ANSI_X3.4-1968 label seem dead rare. I'm not aware of
any mailer doing it frequently. A grep in my last year mail archives
spited 2 such mails. So I believe annoyance to users is extremely low,
and so would be benefit of a fix.
· Drawbacks should be evaluated. I'm not sure, because I didn't test
it. But I can't really imagine any possible drawback, in practice.
I'm not really for it.
If something invalid had to be accepted, lets's talk about spaces
and tabs in encoded words: Annoyance is much less infrequent, benefit
would be great, and practical drawbacks don't exist. See discussion in
wish/1062 "rfc2047 encoded headers incorrectly parsed" and Debian
Wish#364941 "mutt: wish less strict RFC 2047 header decoding". And
numerous user complaints on mu and cmm. So far at least 4 guys
reinvented the wheel, writing similar patches. Myself included. Grep
found 265 such mails in my archives: Nearly 1 per day.
Bye! Alain.
--
Followups to bug reports are public, and should go to bug-any@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
and the reporter (unless he is a member of mutt-dev). Do not CC mutt-dev mailing
list, the BTS does it already. Do not send to mutt-dev only, your writings would
not be tracked. Do not remove the "mutt/nnnn:" tag from subject.