Re: Stripping multipart/alternative messages and accepting thetext/plain part.

["Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at systemhalted dot org>]

On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Jonathan Larmour <jifl@jifvik.org> wrote:
> On 11/03/12 22:10, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>
>> Comments on allowing HTML email?
>
> I thought I, for one, tackled the main issues as part of here:
>
> http://sourceware.org/ml/overseers/2012-q1/msg00070.html

I am not on the overseers mailing list and your reply did not include
my email (and I did not consider that I should be reading the list).
Thank you for following up with a summary.

Could you please comment on the strategy of using DIR/mimeremove to
allow legitimate use of multipart/alternative email that has a minimum
of a text/plain part?

Think of text/plain as a "safe" rendering of the text/html part that
users send and therefore acceptable to the list as a whole, while
still keeping out the spammers that send only html email.

So far I see the following consensus:

* Per Bothner - General agreement that HTML email has some benefit. No
direct comment on DIR/mimeremove.

* Christopher Faylor - Not keen on DIR/mimeremove for reasons of
stripping html attachments, but not explicitly against the idea.

* Frank Ch. Eigler - Considers DIR/mimeremove sensible.

* Jonathan Larmour - No comment on DIR/mimeremove.

I would like to reach the conclusion that either:

(a) The lists will *not* support multipart/alternative text/plain, and why.

(b) The lists *will* accept only the text/plain portion of a
multipart/alternative.

Knowing either (a) or (b) will allow me to communicate expectations to
our volunteers and allow them to take action accordingly.

I started this conversation with the hope that we might agree to (b)
and I still consider it a valid outcome.

Cheers,
Carlos.