Question of the day:
Is there a need for Hypermail to provide users with the ability to configure external programs to decode certain mime types ? And would you use it ?
What follows is the summary of proposals concerning attachments. I'd like to hear from others as to how you feel. If you don't want to post to the list then please drop me a note. I suspect that file naming and external mime decoding will be the biggest areas of discussion. ;)
printcomment() will be used to indicate if a message contains attachments. It will be in the message information content block at the top of the message. <!-- attachment="filepath1" --> ... <!-- attachment="filepathN" -->
The content-transfer-encoding stuff should be undone and the things saved as binary (not base64 etc).
If the MIME type is known, adding an extension to the file when it is saved to disk would aid a browser in processing the file with a helper application upon retrieval. This proposal is satisfied if Proposal #5 is implemented.
For security reasons, *all* binary attachments should be written to disk with file permissions of 444 or equivalent read-only access and should *never* allowed to be executable.
<a href="budget.doc">budget.doc</a>
2. It is possible to configure where attachment names are stored. The current options are in the current archive directory or in a single subdirectory of the current archive directory.
The user should be able to control the use of attachments by:
-- Kent Landfield Phone: 1-817-545-2502 Email: kent_at_landfield.com http://www.landfield.com/ Email: kent_at_nfr.net http://www.nfr.net/ Please send comp.sources.misc related mail to kent_at_landfield.com Search the Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive at http://www.faqs.org/faqs/Received on Thu 11 Jun 1998 05:54:00 PM GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu 22 Feb 2007 07:33:49 PM GMT GMT