[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names
From: |
Paul Fox |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names |
Date: |
Sat, 09 Jun 2012 22:46:49 -0400 |
ken wrote:
> >is mh transparent to encoded receipient names? i.e., if i receive a
> >mail message containing a recipient name such as:
> >
> > =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rickard_Ekl=F6f?= <address@hidden>
> >or
> > =?big5?B?TWFycyBDaGFuZyixabnFpOUp?= <address@hidden>
> >
> >can i assume that string hasn't been munged in any way by mh, and that
> >if i simply reply, then recipients of the new message will see that
> >name correctly rendered? (assuming they're not running mh ;-)
> >i.e., i'm hoping this is strictly a presentation issue in mh, and not
> >something deeper.
>
> Those RFC 2407 encodings are designed to be RFC 822 "atoms" and as
> a result the handling of them in old decrepit mailers like mh should
> just work :-); in terms of the header parser routines they should
> handle them fine. That's always been my experience.
your ideas intrigue me, and i'd like to subscribe to your newsletter!
>
> >also, is there a simple way to manually render these encodings, in
> >order to see what they really look like?
>
> I guess you've had your own custom scan format and mhl format forever?
> The ones shipped with newer versions of nmh can do it for you automatically;
> check out the "decode" mh-format function and the same option for mhl.
>
> If you just want to decode one header, try:
>
> $(libdir)/ap -format '%(decode(friendly{text}))' '<To/From header>'
you're absolutely right that i've been tweaking the same forms for
probably 20 years now, and totally missed this modernization. i
assumed this was all part of the "gotta finally get this mime stuff
happening" push that's hoped-for-soon. silly me.
however: that being said, neither your one-liner above, nor a
"scan -form <nmh-etc-dir>/scan.default" of the messages in question
does the right thing. clearly they should, so clearly now the problem
is on my end.
thanks!
paul
>
> --Ken
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nmh-workers mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
=---------------------
paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 61.5 degrees)
- [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Paul Fox, 2012/06/09
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Ken Hornstein, 2012/06/09
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names,
Paul Fox <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Ken Hornstein, 2012/06/09
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Alexander Zangerl, 2012/06/09
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Ken Hornstein, 2012/06/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, valdis . kletnieks, 2012/06/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Ken Hornstein, 2012/06/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, valdis . kletnieks, 2012/06/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Paul Fox, 2012/06/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Ken Hornstein, 2012/06/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Ken Hornstein, 2012/06/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] question about encoded recipient names, Paul Fox, 2012/06/10