Re: [Nmh-workers] rebuilding a borked MIME multipart/ structure?

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 07:49:58 +0700, Robert Elz said:
>     Date:        Tue, 21 Apr 2015 19:49:25 -0400
>     From:        Valdis Kletnieks <address@hidden>
>     Message-ID:  <address@hidden>
>
>   | Which of course in any standard-compliant MUA will almost certainly do
>   | one of the first two and never bother looking at the third one.
>
> Without knowing what the parts contain, I can't say whether the format is
> appropriate or not, but your interpretation of what should happen is
> incorrect - a standards compliant MUA that understands text/calendar should
> process that part (the last understood alternative is the one that is
> supposed to be preferred)

Gaah.  Pass me the caffeine, will ya? :)

I got led down the primrose path of thinking it was the *first* understood
one because I've seen far too many meeting invites that had crucial info
buried in the text/html that would be ignored if only the text/calendar
was processed....

... though now I am starting to understand why I've been in so many
meetings where it seems like only the organizer and myself had read the memo :)

pgpg3LKMfuX2E.pgp
Description: PGP signature