Re: [Nmh-workers] semantics of mhshow -type and -part

[Paul Fox]

david wrote:
 > Paul F. wrote:
 > 
 > >     http://www.foxharp.boston.ma.us/tmp/mh_samples/28.txt
 > 
 > So, just "mhshow" does the right thing (parts 1.1.1 and part 2)
 > for me.  It does seem odd that "-type text/plain" doesn't show
 > part 1.2.  Esp. given that "-type text/html" does show part
 > 1.1.1.  But maybe it's due to trying too hard to obey
 > multipart/alternative.  And maybe I'm catching up to your
 > thought process.  But I still think that more than one part of a
 > multipart/alternative should never be shown, unless they are
 > requested by multiple -part switches.

okay.  we're agreed that multiple -part options should override
"alternative".  it wasn't at all clear to me that an
underspecified -type (i.e., "-type text") shouldn't do the same, but i
understand your reasoning.

for completeness, here's a case i didn't ask about.  given my message 27:
 msg part  type/subtype              size description
  27       multipart/mixed           1534
     1     multipart/alternative      845
     1.1   text/enriched               33
     1.2   text/html                  295
     1.3   text/plain                  30
     2     application/x-zip-compre    57 Dummy Attachment

what should "mhshow -type text/enriched -type text/plain" do?  mh
currently just shows one of them.  again, i feel it should show both,
but again, your (and ralph's) reasoning presumably says no.

paul
=----------------------
 paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 12.2 degrees)