W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > November 2011

RE: Sending e-mails from a pipeline...

From: Philip Fennell <Philip.Fennell@marklogic.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 01:26:46 -0800
To: Murray Altheim <murray11@altheim.com>, "xproc-dev@w3.org" <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D20C296D14127D4EBD176AD949D8A75A0600CE48BC@EXCHG-BE.marklogic.com>
Hello all,

My use-case was the creation of a pipeline that would aggregate multiple XHTML pages from a web site, for example the XML Calabash Reference, into a single XHTML document that I could then send, via e-mail, to my Kindle as a single operation. So, in my example, I would need attachments. That said, the altering use-case with plain text e-mails would be very useful too.


Regards

Philip




-----Original Message-----
From: Murray Altheim [mailto:murray11@altheim.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 10:16 PM
To: xproc-dev@w3.org
Subject: Re: Sending e-mails from a pipeline...

On 16/11/11 06:22, Norman Walsh wrote:
> Alex Milowski<alex@milowski.org>  writes:
>>
>> We should consider a step definition for SMTP.
>
> It's tempting to try to make something simple. The simple cases seem
> to be covered by
>
>    http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-klyne-message-rfc822-xml-03

>
> Though that's clearly been stalled for, uh, 9 years.
>
> The problem with the less simple cases is handling all of the MIME
> encoding/disposition/id/boundary/etc. malarkey.
>
> We have machinery for (at least some of) MIME, in p:http-request, but
> that seems to set the bar pretty high for the simple case.

Hi Norm,

Perhaps we're making this more complicated than it really needs be.
What are the requirements here, really? If it's simply being able
to send a text message from a pipeline for purposes of alerting an
admin of something that has happened during processing, such as an
error or a successful action. An ASCII-only email would be fine for
that. If we were to reduce the scope to solely a to and from address,
a subject line, and an ASCII (well, possibly UTF-8) message body,
then that seems fairly manageable.

I for one would be quite happy with that, and it would be a welcome
addition to our project. Certainly hits the 80/20, maybe the 90/10
point for emails coming from a pipeline. If an attachments facility
were added that would cover the remaining 20, but even without that
(for our purposes) the minimal would suffice. I wouldn't want rocket
science.

Murray

............................................................................
Murray Altheim <murray11 at altheim dot com>                       = =  ===
http://www.altheim.com/murray/                                     ===  ===
SGML Grease Monkey, Banjo Player, Wantanabe Zen Monk               = =  ===

       Boundless wind and moon - the eye within eyes,
       Inexhaustible heaven and earth - the light beyond light,
       The willow dark, the flower bright - ten thousand houses,
       Knock at any door - there's one who will respond.
                                       -- The Blue Cliff Record


Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 09:27:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 16 November 2011 09:27:23 GMT