On 9/11/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gratuitous arguments: > > CFJ 1580 is a useful precedent here: it ruled that players cannot be > expected to decode base64 on their own, so a message relying on such > decoding might be ineffective for unclarity. However, it also ruled > that base64 is acceptable in the context of MIME, when signalled with > appropriate message headers; decoding base64 in that situation is an > ordinary part of mail reception, usuall automated. > > Peekee's message obscures its content principally by HTML entity encoding > in an HTML message body. The message has the header "Content-Type: > text/html; charset=UTF-8" which indicates the HTML nature of the content, > but it does *not* have the "MIME-Version:" header which is mandatory > for a MIME message. This situation is therefore pretty much an exact > parallel of CFJ 1580.
Well-formed or not, the message rendered perfectly for me (albeit in Gmail, which is probably to be expected). I marked Peekee's re-registration without even realizing that it was encoded in HTML or that there might be a controversy. -root
