[5429] in www-talk@info.cern.ch
Re: Mailcap extensions (was Re: Client Compliance)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (wmperry@spry.com)
Wed Aug 31 10:50:37 1994
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 1994 16:36:45 +0200
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: wmperry@spry.com
From: wmperry@spry.com
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
HALLAM-BAKER Phillip writes:
> In article <836A@cernvm.cern.ch>, nsb@nsb.fv.com (Nathaniel Borenstein ) writes:
>
>
> |>Excerpts from www-talk: 28-Aug-94 Re: Mailcap extensions (was..
> |>wmperry@spry.com (3089)
> |>
> |>> I think the mailcap parser you wrote in tcl and the one I write in
> |>> elisp for my browser are about the only ones. Did your mailcap
> |>> parser ever make it into tkWWW?
> |>
> |>Well, there's the one in metamail, and the one in Mosaic.....
>
> Errm no, have a look at the Mosaic mailcap parser... :-)
hehe - M-x amen. :) To clarify:
I meant a mailcap parser that correctly understands the latest mailcap
draft, with needsx11, etc. And of course, any good mailcap parser should
actually _use_ the test=.... field, and not just blindly take the first one
it finds, which is what Mosaic does, therefore I don't count it. :)
I did leave one out of the list though - lynx 2.3 (maybe as early as 2.2)
does honor the test clause.
-Bill P.
