© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
9199653
demo site
(Get the code!)
> This isn't entirely the case.
It currently is a problem. I wrote not a real problem because fixing that should be fairly simple, sorry.
> So parsing is hard and currently we fail in the first example to get that as
> one address. To ease that part, I'd like to put quotes around names that
> contain commas if we know that's just one name. Extracting
> =?ISO-8859-
> from a mail is such a situation.
> I do wonder if rearchitecting so that you *do* maintain the 2047 atoms
> internally until display, and until initializing the edit fields in the
> compose window, might not be more maintainable in the long run.
What I meant is, that it has to be represented as quoted in the edit fields. At which stage before it gets quoted is another question. The point is, that quoted representation can easily be displayed, read and edited by the user but a quoted-printable or even base64 can't.
I'd be happy to get rid of the whole encoding/quoting until immediately before sending. Do you think it's safe if we'd just handle everything until the angled address as the display name? That would also solve the current problem with the first example—but I fear there will be a pitfall somewhere.