[imp] Signature

[Jan Schneider]

Zitat von Simon Brereton <simon.buongiorno at gmail.com>:

> On Jan 21, 2013 2:13 PM, "Michael M Slusarz" <slusarz at horde.org> wrote:
>>
>> Quoting Luis Felipe Marzagao <lfbm.andamentos at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> I also think wrinting a msg and not seeing what will be the final text
> is really confusing and nonintuitive, mainly for real life/regular users,
> but since this is open source software, at least you can alter the code.
> Imagine if it were proprietary/closed software.
>>
>>
>> Several of you have raised this "argument".  And it is completely bogus.
>>
>> NO MUA THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN "GUARANTEES" THAT WHAT YOU "SEE" IN THE
> COMPOSE WINDOW IS ACTUALLY WHAT IS SENT OUT.  MUA's add all sorts of things
> to outgoing messages that users have no control of.  MUA's should be able
> to change/fix formatting as necessary to fix user errors.  MUA's can
> convert HTML text to plain text, or vice versa, or add different
> representations of the data (which IMP allows).  An admin can add a trailer
> to every message which cannot be altered by the user and will never be seen
> by the user (which IMP allows).
>
> Not that I care, but BECAUSE you've never seen an MUA that does that, is a
> very good reason.  Most people contribute to open source projects to be
> BETTER than what is it there.
>
>> The simple fact with signatures IS THAT THE **USER** IS THE ONE THAT
> ADDED THE SIGNATURE DATA IN THE FIRST PLACE.  This is not the case of
> someone "altering" a message or "adding" data without the user's consent.
>  For a signature to be added to a message, the user necessarily needed to
> create the data at one point.  Nothing is being "added" or "altered" to the
> message that the user has not already tacitly approved.
>
> And therefore it would be nice for the user to decide where the signature
> should go, and if for example, data should be added or subtracted.
>
>> This is a great example of a specious argument: one that might look like
> it has merit on its face, but if you even take a few seconds to analyze the
> details there is absolutely no basis to it.
>
> You may be right, but unless there's a security reason not to, I think
> given the clamour the idea could at least be entertained.  I appreciate it
> may not be high priority, but if it's on the list with a bounty set then
> all the people who want it can contribute.
>
> Simon

While we talk about mailers and features, can you *please* use a  
mailer that does proper quoting? Reading your replies is a major PITA  
because whatever mailer you use completely breaks the message flow,  
leaving one with no idea which text you quoted and which you added  
yourself.
-- 
Jan Schneider
The Horde Project
http://www.horde.org/