From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Yann Hodique Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: BEGIN_SRC..END_SRC Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 15:28:57 +0200 Message-ID: <87mx5gxizq.fsf@gmail.com> References: <871umzrvfw.fsf@gmail.com> <83d36j59gv.fsf@gnu.org> <87r4uz58e3.fsf@sec.modprobe.de> <83aa1n57p4.fsf@gnu.org> <5D17181ED92C4552AE8D4404DD035CA0@us.oracle.com> <87vck8sfyv.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <85obq05aua.fsf@iznogoud.viz> <87r4uvs4ae.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87397b15u7.fsf@gnu.org> <87y5p2nhc3.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87k40lsfuv.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87k40ljtay.fsf@gmx.com> <87fwb8sdeh.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <877gwkzcsm.fsf@gmail.com> <878vh0rz75.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1336656556 17741 80.91.229.3 (10 May 2012 13:29:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 13:29:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 10 15:29:15 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SSTQg-00053c-VG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 May 2012 15:29:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51550 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SSTQd-00064Z-OU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 May 2012 09:29:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43188) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SSTQa-00063W-6o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 May 2012 09:29:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SSTQU-0005ly-Fy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 May 2012 09:29:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:59897) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SSTQU-0005ln-1q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 May 2012 09:29:02 -0400 Original-Received: by wgbds1 with SMTP id ds1so439156wgb.0 for ; Thu, 10 May 2012 06:28:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:face:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type; bh=+mEcVmBiAfCdfEOuXHBngPkz8b8lt8EOMjnwL6fqqfA=; b=qfDQtgTw4Em9zP/nDtLBOYyUyb5vgb6qRDmJoOBEbuw5KY/F7jnwQvKILkIKgzRlX6 rzwUN1LMQIjENte2daULmK2GLsH37yWcsulN1cRO3ZyKcgQXdg7PiUl8qGmBMK9FPtC1 XE23oq6/QP36EoYSNQNxX5xZcyENywYtcQ1n9HSS0tFLC/5pC2ZeRDmKRrC/zpB8q311 sNb29xz2cf6erVmPxz//YtW97eK/t0sGhhB92UMfGsqsT4n3wNCFnjcxiNM7tNP/+ace OajEb51U7YbCUGatFFn6nPt+6ri3PEijAeUXuwYouiwCPaTsyHxqTfVw6Gj8LBqlRMXn CJSQ== Original-Received: by 10.180.88.233 with SMTP id bj9mr9556575wib.1.1336656539859; Thu, 10 May 2012 06:28:59 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from ubuntu.hodique.info (AAnnecy-552-1-228-163.w83-197.abo.wanadoo.fr. [83.197.116.163]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o9sm5247567wia.3.2012.05.10.06.28.58 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 10 May 2012 06:28:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <878vh0rz75.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (Stephen J. Turnbull's message of "Thu, 10 May 2012 21:35:26 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAJ1BMVEUEBgMUFBEnIR07MStT QjlvWkyEbl2ccWaVe2mpi3qxj3bDoIz+//wlCgCYAAACWUlEQVQ4EQXBQXIVVRQA0HNvGPNvJ45J 98epQhIdK6ALsNyA63EPLsEtWFQ5FlLFVDodHVr8fh0dQj/PSQAAgAQAAEgAGG4mEKoSAKyGgerV WgIIxKBoWkgAh2GwRmwjqkuAyPNpsNYh0UQCVMXFNA3DVCNVPQFy+PH6qxfD0CJCaxKgIr97+er5 2u56VyUBhouxb49evZjqSNsiAdrBEu2/r6/H+6L3BITMQdX556+UEAmo0nvheP3DpFdPwOAqCvrZ TbBFAnHgMiCclRjGBOLhAmBzpM4T6Mfr8w3othGJc+J63AuwX+qn94kr8sgJQNNa4jSaWNdf30At 9w1JXhzHYoirT7fwpDNI8ubm6TlWw4r+184aSX/08urKsa+vpyv++eWPFT0Jj4JlOv4UXX/d17eU 5BNTa2MeLfppev6i2CT9dqcW8njb3np32+iSmpM2whft2cPoDJL2D2D/eHF/64mgKvFhsZvJsw/d ZdautpboP9+GxKd3z+JwcNK6hLkF+L0P9e+73lRI6F0H4qkvd7ZeCYzgG/PdaBW9WgLLwjzfXX7Y vL+rbosExb6vYluet7ulqd4TMLZFU/Xbx1NTm0ro3HN1mudhX060Q7WEmE5jrfk03ebdAlsl+LuW bpm+NY19URWHLSHGsbdZm4fH86nQVQLn+5ytnR2tc9O2h23NKtR0ue7z3v+cTwt1eaghI4ZhaDn1 u97Wpc2Ndt9aS8TAxXn/8P5Nv1uJDFUZnMba43pa53UN9H2vLjufPX/IiJtjnZYJojqp9zEek2c3 399MhRAR/gfpVBU4QWr2iwAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 74.125.82.41 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:150418 Archived-At: >>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen J Turnbull writes: > Yann Hodique writes: >> >> As I said in a previous mail, it doesn't change anything for GMail, and >> that is also (unfortunately) conformant. > I disagree. It may be unfortunate, but it is not conformant. To > quote the RFCs: [...] > So it isn't optional behavior. It's required. It's simply the case > that the authors of RFC 2046 could imagine stuff like Microsoft HTML, > in which case you probably want to treat text/html as binary if you > don't have a decent HTML rendering engine to use. However, "should" > in the section 4.1.4 is not blanket permission to treat all unknown > text/* as application/octet-stream, as Gmail apparently does. Well, let's not go to nit-picking about issues we can't solve anyway :) The behavior is clearly broken, and I'm also not confident anybody will fix it (they might even pretend that's intentional for whatever twisted reason, or that the phrasing doesn't have to respect an RFC that was written at a later point in time). I personally wouldn't fight for a "should". >> Only [Gnus] we can fix. So in any case, I don't believe we can >> ever afford not to emit the text/plain alternative for dumb (yet >> potentially even conformant) MUAs. > Maybe. > But given that we know that Gmail deliberately goes out of its way to > suck in our community (eg, encouraging top-posting, which has its > place but it ain't here[1]), I don't really think we should consider > problems with Gmail an argument against using standard constructs. If > Thunderbird or nmh or mutt has issues or whatever-the-GNOMEish-MUA-is > does, that's another matter. Let's focus on the matter at hand :) The fact is people use GMail to access the mailing list, and I don't see a point in annoying them gratuitously. By gratuitously I mean choosing a standard construct they (and probably others) don't recognize over another standard construct they (and probably others) do recognize. That's an argument *for* using standard constructs, just not *any* standard construct. >> Given that, since Emacs is probably the only "MUA" that will ever >> implement a handler for any elisp-related MIME type, whether it's >> text/emacs-lisp or application/emacs-lisp is probably not that much of >> an issue (but again, we should use the former) > No, it's the *only* issue here. If we use text/emacs-lisp, people who > use conformant MUAs have a choice of font-locked display or plain > text. If we use application/emacs-lisp, people who use conformant > MUAs have a choice of font-locked display or saving it to a file. That's not what I mean. What I'm saying is: 1. "application/emacs-lisp" will work mostly (only?) in Gnus 2. "text/emacs-lisp" will work on conformant MUAs, but is broken in common ones. It might also be font-locked in some MUAs, eventually 3. "text/plain + application/emacs-lisp" will work (potentially sub-optimally) on conformant MUAs and in common ones. It is also font-locked in Gnus 4. "text/plain + text/emacs-lisp" will work on conformant MUAs and in common ones. It might also be font-locked in some MUAs, eventually You're saying 2. is better that 1., which I totally agree with. What I'm saying is that 4. is even better because it's just as standard, and better supported overall. And as a side note, I'm saying that the MUAs that might do something fancy with an elisp MIME type are probably all running in Emacs, so that realistically 3. and 4. are not that different. Meaning that 3. is probably kind of acceptable in the short term (as long as Gnus is not fixed) even though it's dodgy. Also note that none of application/emacs-lisp or text/emacs-lisp are registered MIME types. That's *also* something that should be fixed, and presumably before Gnus starts getting fixed. Yann. -- Heaven must be the sound of running water. -- Fremen Saying