Re: multipart/alternative question
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 01:14:22PM -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote:
> If you want to add a config option to allow it to count ALL
> alternatives, that's fine by me, but I think counting only the last
> alternative is perfectly reasonable and compliant.
Well, I think it depends on what the user of mutt wants to know. I
would want to know how many attachments there are, someone else might
want to know how many attachments would make up the most faithful
representation, and yet another person cares about how many
attachments mutt figures he/she might want to look at. You could as
well count only the attachments mutt can display (with or without the
help of external programs) because the user doesn't need to know about
attachments he cannot even display.
> Granted, mutt will only *display* the attachment inline if you view
> the message as text/html, but whether it's displayed or not should
> have nothing to do with whether it counts as an attachment. I think t
> should counts as an attachment if a) I consider inlined PDFs to be
> attachments and b) it is in the last component of the
> multipart/alternative.
Hm, when it shouldn't matter for the count if an attachment is
displayed or not, why should it matter if an attachment would be part
of the most faithful representation of the message? Being part of the
most faithful representation or not is only relevant when the
attachment is displayed within the representation it is part of.
It shouldn't matter for the count what an attachment is part of or
where in the message it is. It's still there.