[Tickets #3367] RESOLVED: Mime Message shows no parts

[bugs@bugs.horde.org]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. THIS EMAIL ADDRESS IS NOT MONITORED.

Ticket URL: http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/?id=3367
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ticket             | 3367
 Updated By         | phyre at rogers.com
 Summary            | Mime Message shows no parts
 Queue              | IMP
 Version            | 4.0.4
 State              | Resolved
 Priority           | 1. Low
 Type               | Bug
 Owners             | Michael Slusarz
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


phyre at rogers.com (2006-02-03 09:18) wrote:

> Are you saying that if this is in there that the image isn't displayed 
> when viewed in a pop-up window?  I can't reproduce this.
No.  I am saying that this is working correctly, where the 'signature' to
the message correctly is not listed as an attachment but is displayed
properly embedded in the HTML e-mail.  You mentioned that the image
shouldn't display on its own, and that's correct- it displays by the img
tag embedded in the HTML message.

> allowing HTML messages to be viewed automatically (or at all) can
> open huge security holes.
Dating back to the design choices of HTML e-mail, but not the issue
for here.

> "secure by default"
I'm a strong believer of this, however somehow I missed this
option.  It's a fairly important option, that I'm sure is very
commonly changed.  Might it be wise to make this more obvious
such as a configuration option or place some note in the installation
documentation on it?

> the "feature-richness" is determined by the order the part
> appears in the multipart.
Didn't know there was a generally accepted system for that.
I guess what I was thinking it as what the user would see
as intutitve, but that should be implied based on what most
mailers will do.  Thanks for the explaination.



So in the end, I think we squashed the bug relating to #2 and a couple
earlier in the thread.  I'd recommend adding a more obvious documentation
note at the html inline option, but I'll leave that up to you folks.

Thanks again!