=- Jim Allen wrote on Fri 2.Mar'07 at 20:00:41 -0600 -=
> >Why would you want to send back the original attachment(s) unchanged?
> >Is this a more "sophisticated" variant of TOFU quoting?
>
> In the current mutt if one replies to a multipart/alternative
> e-mail and includes the original e-mail, then only the plain
> text portion of that e-mail is included. The rest is discarded.
> I have had many complain to me about this, since they prefer the
> html portions of the mulitpart/alternative and are unhappy with
> being forced to use plain text.
See alternative_order, auto_view, and '?' help in compose menu ->
edit-type (=> macro) (optionally edit_headers).
This should allow you to conveniently produce HTML eMail.
See also MuttFaq/ Attachments on wiki.
> So mime_reply offers a simple way to handle that situation where only
> mutt's new response is in plain text. The previous chain of e-mail is
> left in it original format. So from an html e-mail user's perspective
> they see the previous e-mails essentially the same.
So either I was right about the TOFU'ing or I'm missing something here.
What do _you_ do with the _HTML part_ of the eMail?
Really just resend it back unchanged?!
Don't people have "sent" folders?
("but what about the context?" you might ask: tag-forward it to
those requesting it _when_ they do so, or do they really check
the whole history with each eMail?!)
--
© Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal!
EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude.
You're responsible for ALL of it: you get what you give.
