Subject: .Introduction
This is a dummy FAQ in the form of a digest that will hopefully be
understood and displayed sensibly by
a) MIME-compliant readers that understand multipart/digest or
(more likely) treat it as multipart/mixed.
b) News and mail readers that understand how to break a digest
down into parts (whether they are expecting strict RFC 1153
format, or just Chris Lewis' "Minimal Digest Format").
c) Readers that understand neither, and just display it as it is.
This has been mailed to the FAQ-maintainers list and posted to misc.test.
Please report how it appears in various mail and news readers.
Table of Contents:
Q1 What is the current text proposed for digests in
gransdon-of-1036?
<cid:Q1@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Q2 Where is this being discussed? </a>
<cid:Q2@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Q3 What is "grandson-of-1036"? </a>
<cid:Q3@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Q4 What is all that "cid" nonsense?
<cid:Q4@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Q5 So how does this FAQ appear in actual newsreaders?
<cid:Q5@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Content-Id: <Q1@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Subject: Q1: What is the current text proposed for digests in
gransdon-of-1036?
The Content-Type: "multipart/digest" is commended for any article
composed of multiple messages more conveniently viewed as separate
entities. The "boundary" should be composed of 28 hyphens (US-ASCII
45) (which makes each boundary delimiter 30 hyphens, or 32 for the
final one) so as to accord with current practice for digests [RFC
1153].
[Actually, this conflicts with some present digest usage (such as the
news.answers rules), but should still be the right way to go. I suggest
this is left in for now (just to stake a claim), while we discuss the
matter with the news.answers moderators and the faq-maintainers.]
[RFC 1153] F. Wancho, "Digest Message Format", RFC 1153, April 1990.
You will also need to look at RFC 2046 for the exact definition of
"multipart/digest".
------------------------------
Content-Id: <Q2@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Subject: Q2: Where is this being discussed?
On the Faq-Maintainers List.
Send "subscribe" message to faq-maintainers-request@faqs.org.
------------------------------
Content-Id: <Q3@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Subject: Q3: What is "grandson-of-1036"?
Look at <http://www.landfield.com/usefor>.
------------------------------
Content-Id: <Q4@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Subject: Q4: What is all that "cid" nonsense?
An attempt to enable clicking on the Table of Contents to take you
straight to the answer. The "cid" URL is described in RFC 2111, and I
_think_ I have got its usage correct, but it is clear that Netscape at
least does not implement it. Do any others? It would seem to be the proper
way to do it according to RFC 2111, and maybe readers will start to
implement it if there is the demand - certainly the necessary protocol
appears to be already fully specified.
------------------------------
Content-Id: <Q5@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>
Subject: Q5: So how does this FAQ appear in actual newsreaders?
I have tried it in nn and in Netscape.
Nn was happy to treat it as a digest, using the 'G%' command, showing me a
list of the Subject headers and allowing me to select ones for viewing. It
showed them in alphabetical order (which is why I have put the 'Q' numbers
at the start of each Subject). The overall result was similar to the way
it treats comp.risks and other FAQs which use the Chris Lewis format. Not
brilliant, but that's how nn is.
Netscape recognised it immediately as multipart/digest, showing the
various parts inline with nice separators (or offering to show/file/etc them
separately) with the Subject lines nicely emboldened and the Content-ID
headers suppressed. Quite pleasing in fact. But it did not recognise the
"cid" URLs.
It would be interesting to hear reports of how it appeared in other
mailers and newsreaders.
--------------------------------
End of Digest
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe send a message to majordomo@faqs.org as
unsubscribe faq-maintainers fill-in-your-email-address-here
*************************************************************
[
FAQ Archive |
Search FAQ Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet References
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997-2000
All rights reserved