[Chandler-dev] attachments vs. multipart-alternative
bkirsch at osafoundation.org
Thu Jun 14 14:43:17 PDT 2007
Sounds good Jeffrey,
See my one comment in line.
On Jun 14, 2007, at 11:16 AM, Jeffrey Harris wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> Thanks for the quick response.
>> First alternative types are intended to provide the same information
>> in the different renderable formats such as HTML, Rich Text, and
>> Plain Text. While it could be argued that .ics and .eimml are just
>> different views of the same data, .ics and .eimml are not
>> *renderable* in Email Clients.
> I'd argue that text/plain is a step down from the data we're sending
> (EIMML). If Thunderbird had an XSL pre-processor of XML bodies I
> my argument would be stronger (we could make the .eimml render
> nicely in
> browsers that way), in the real world I buy that it's a bit of a
> to think of EIMML as closely analogous to HTML.
>> I am also concerned about making this
>> wide a change at this point in the Preview schedule (I am leaving on
>> June 21st for EuroPython).
> Sure, not for preview. Perhaps afterwards? Lets pick up this thread
> again when we're over the hump ;)
>> Second using the alternative type means the average user will not see
>> the (ics or eimml) in his or her mail client. This to me is also an
>> issue. If a non-Chandler user wants to add the Event or Task to
>> Outlook or ICal, the .ics file will not be accessible. In fact the
>> user will not even know that an .ics attachment was sent with the
> I think we'd probably want to continue to add .ics attachments for
> events. A large fraction of Chandler emails would still have
> attachments, but I think iCalendar attachments are more
> recognizable and
> thus less annoying. I still think having our "normal" emails not have
> attachments would be a win.
I was not advocating getting rid of ICS. I think it is a very important
tool for adoption. I was raising the point that if ICS was an
part to the plain/text part, that the average mail user would
have no way of adding the ICS Event / Task to his or her
Since ICS is *important* and must be easily accessible from a
Chandler Mail Message I don't see how it could be an alternative
> I am curious, too, how many people will be bemused to find attachments
> on their emails sent from Chandler. Hopefully preview will soon
> give us
> a group to survey!
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
More information about the chandler-dev