till at kdab.net
Tue Oct 24 20:41:25 CEST 2006
On Friday 20 October 2006 20:19, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> Hi Joon,
> On Thursday 19 October 2006 11:05, Joon Radley wrote:
> > The only use case we can see for this is where you want to identify
> > the "hidden" meta data attachments like the Toltec blob that gets
> > added. I think adding a field to the MIME part header might be a
> > better solution in this case.
> > Is there any other use cases that shows the benefit of this tag?>
> this is the first one I was thinking of.
> The second one is that we keep some integrity of the XML object
> that it at least knows that an attachement should be part of the
I thought it would serve to distingiush "real" attachments, things the
user has associated explicitely with the object, from "internal" ones,
such as the image mime-part that is created if a contact containts a
picture. If we support attachments in contacts, there would need to be
a way to tell wether an image is simply part of the normal data of the
object, or an attachment.
> Can you make a concrete suggestions for the field of the MIME part
> header, I believe this could work, but also need to give it some more
> thought and hear some feedback from Till and others.
The Content-Type header already supports a name for the mime part. For
If I'm not missing something, that's not enough, though, for the
Till Adam -- till at kdab.net, adam at kde.org
Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, Platform-independent software solutions
More information about the format