Re: [EAI] Re: MIME questions

["Charles Lindsey" <chl at clerew.man.ac.uk>]

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 00:25:26 -0000, Frank Ellermann  
<nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote:

> Charles Lindsey wrote:

> > > In an IETF theory styling itself as "RFC 2231".
>
> > No, it is not a "theory", it is a "proposed
> > standard", just like RFC 2045 and RFC 2822.

> We discussed the implicit side-effects of 2231 wrt
> multiple parameter name=value pairs using the same
> name for some months in USEFOR with Bruce, Ned, and
> Alexey.

Yes, using RFC 2231 for wrappng long lines of parameters is a "ghastly  
mess", but all we are concerned with here is using it for i18n values, and  
for that is is merely an "ordinary mess", and all that is available. For  
sure, we do not want to invent "yet another 8-t0-7 bit conversion", and  
yet Utf8headers requires us to deal with MIME <value>s with UTF-8 in them,  
and RFC2231 provides the only downgrade mechanism already available for  
our use.

> Let's hope that nobody else tried it "successfully",

For sure, RFC 2231 HAS been implemented, though possibly not widely.

> > And raw UTF-8 in any header directly violates a
> > requirement in RFC 2822, but that has not stopped us,
>
> 2822 is the Internet Message format, we "adapted" it
> as necessary in USEFOR, because it didn't fit several
> reqirements for NetNews (in essence creating a proper
> subset of 2822 + plus adding header fields only used
> in NetNews).
>
> We didn't modify MIME 1.0 for NetNews, in my parallel
> universe that would be blasphemy.  I'd really prefer
> it if EAI also stays away from "extending" MIME 1.0 -
> above adding a bunch of new MIME types as outlined in
> the DSN draft.
>
> > We are constructing a new kind of mail object - call
> > it a RFC2822-u object if you like.
>
> <sarcasm> I like to call it message/utf-8 </sarcasm>

Please do not use the term "message/utf-8". If used, it would apply only  
to a certain MIME mechanism, and not as a generic term for any message  
that happens to have UTF8 in its headers somewhere.

And even as a MIME machanism it will not fly in that form, because it  
violates RFC 2045.
> > we are designing a protocol which is supposed to
> > ensure that RFC2822-u objects are converted to RFC2822
> > objects before they are allowed to enter the old
> > non-EAI universe.
>
> You've skipped an important step:  We know how to convert
> message/utf-8 into message/rfc822 for 8BITMIME.  For this
> 8bit part of the universe anything is straight forward.

But we don't know how to convert amessage/utf-8 for an MTA that does not  
do 8BITMIME.

> > we are also inventing a new kind of MIME-Version-1.0
> > object, let us call it a MIME-Version-1.0-u object
>
> Any MIME 1.0 message/rfc822 can be an 8bit multipart/*
> with message/utf-8 parts, and vice versa.  So far not
> "new", that's how MIME and message/utf-8 are designed.
>
> The _new_ concept would be MIME Version-1.0-u (or 2.0)
> allowing raw UTF-8 in its Content-* header fields and
> MIME part headers.

Exactly so. And that feature has been a solid part of Utf8headers for  
quite some time, and Utf8headers is now thought to be almost ready for WG  
Last Call. You are the only person who seems not to accept this feature.


> > we are designing a protocol which is supposed to
> > ensure thar MIME-Version-1.0-u objects are converted
> > to MIME-Version-1.0 objects before they enter to a
> > non-EAI iniverse.
>
> That's shaky.

It is no shakier than converting 8BITMIME stuff to non-8BITMIME.

> MIME is completely transparent, if you don't know it
> you can savely ignore it, and it still works.

No it's NOT transparent. You cannot downgrade 8BOITMIME unbless you  
understand it.

--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 ;                      
   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl at clerew.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5

_______________________________________________
IMA mailing list
IMA at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima