- From: Simon J. Hernandez <simon@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 16:04:52 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
- Cc: <jimbobbs@hotmail.com>, <site-comments@w3.org>, <gerald@w3.org>
Hi Jimmy, Susan. On Sun, 15 Jun 2003, Susan Lesch wrote: > Jimmy Cerra wrote: > > >I checked the list W3C mailing list, and there seems to be a few > >inactive test emails. Unfortunately, they don't seem to accept incoming > >email any more. > > > >> All W3C mailing lists are archived with literal characters, in other > >> words markup will show. This does not seem to be the case. Mail sent as text/html gets stored apart from the header, as a text/html attachment, which, when selected from the archive post, is rendered as expected. HTML-formatted mail will not appear within the body of the archive post in the archives. > >However, URLs seem to be changed into hyperlinks (although the software > >sometimes makes annoying mistakes). Yes, this is true, and I am not sure in which cases it happens. It appears that some characters in URLs cause funky things to happen when they get converted into hyperlinks by Hypermail. Fortunately, this doesn't happen too often. > >The information on mailing list > >format, such as mime-types accepted (text/plain, text/html, > >application/xml...), [I am responding to this statement in a segmented way, please bear with me.] If the note is tagged as text/html by the mailer, it will get treated like any other MIME format that is not text/plain, and stored as an attachment in the archives by our archiving software, in which case you can use any font/format you like. You may send various MIME-typed data to the archives, but, as noted, it will not be presented in the body of the archive post. It is possible, though, to embed XML or other coded segments in a text/plain message, and they normally get rendered as you would expect in the body of the message. It is really only those messages that are identified as text/html or some mixture comprising a multipart bounded message that encounter the condition noted above. > >font/markup, line length, and others, really should > >be added as a note on the main page [1]. I don't quite agree with this statement. While some mailers, and ISPs like AOL, Hotmail, Yahoo, have made the usage of markup in the body of messages a feature to be used in conjunction with their hosted services, that is not the standard case. In our archives, features such as font and markup are irrelevant since anything that is not text/plain, will get stored as an attachment. As for line length, we do not have a policy for this. It is expected that you would use a readable format for your posts. Anything exceeding 72 characters long may be a bit tedious for some to read. > Simon, do you think a note could be added to [1] explaining how W3C > archives treat incoming URIs (see the original question, too at [2])? I am not certain why this is necessary. I don't disagree it would be helpful, I am just not clear why it is needed. A URI gets posted in a note and gets rendered as a literal string, which, happily, because we happen to use Hypermail, gets converted to a hyperlink. What is the amibiguity that would be cleared up by a note? (Again, I am not trying to be contentious or difficult, I just don't understand the ambiguity.) > [1] http://www.w3.org/Mail/ > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/site-comments/2003Jun/thread.html#14 > > >One other question: What's the line length, then? > > The incoming line length is preserved in W3C archives. (Again, copying > Gerald Oskoboiny in case I make a mistake there.) I believe this is correct. If you use a mailer that does not use line wrapping, you will have 1-line paragraphs. Simon a. ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2822.txt -- Simon J. Hernandez | http://people.w3.org/simon/ | simon@w3.org World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) http://www.w3.org MIT Laboratory for Computer Science 200 Technology Square NE43-340 Cambridge, MA 02139-3579 USA Voice: +1.617.253.2920 Fax: +1.617.258.5999
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2003 16:08:48 UTC