Re: [exim] tnef attachments

On 10 Dec 2004, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

> OK, I had said before that TNEF was a packaging rather than an
> application data format. At least, that is what I had understood to
> date. However, reading more closely into MS's own briefings, it
> appears they're not very sure themselves.

<snip>

Yes, TNEF is a packaging, but (as you identified), both the packaging
*and* the format of the content are controlled by a single, overloaded
option. So it's a packaging that is only used when a particular format of
content is selected.

No, it makes no sense at all. All I am thankful for is that this is not
one of the "oh it only doesn't work for you because you don't use
Microsoft" things. I've had complaints before from Outlook Express users
about receiving this junk and not being able to open it. Rightly or
wrongly, that does make it considerably easier to persuade the senders to
change.

Whilst I don't pretend to understand the ins and outs of Microsoft's "Rich
Text" content formatting which provokes the TNEF junk, it is true to say
that I've never yet had any sender complain about a noticeable difference
when switching from it to the HTML option. (Of course, whether you want
HTML e-mail is a different question. But at least it's MIME.) I think it
may possibly disable editing of e-mails in Word (!) but, whatever, I've
never yet had any comeback from telling anyone to change it.


Tim