[RCD] Reply to HTML messages in HTML format

Rimas Kudelis rq at akl.lt
Wed Oct 6 15:14:34 CEST 2010


2010.10.06 11:47, A.L.E.C rašė:
> I'd like to implement this feature, but maybe we could also do some
> unification in editor type handling. Let's see what we should do in
> compose modes:
>
> 1. NEW: Here we're using htmleditor option, to enable/disable HTML
> editor. No problem here.
>
> 2. DRAFT and EDIT-AS-NEW: Here we should use format of draft/edited
> message. No problem here.
>
> 3. REPLY: Now we're lacking something here and current behaviour is not
> 100% consistent. So, what we can do? Use htmleditor setting no matter
> what is format of replied message? No. Here's my proposal. We could
> extend htmleditor option to 3-option switch:
> - 'never', (0)
> - 'only on reply to HTML message', (2)
> - 'always' (1).
> I think this is self explanatory. When 0, we'll always disable HTML
> editor, when 1 we'll always enable HTML editor, when 2 we'll enable HTML
> editor only when replied message is in HTML format.
>
> Here I see one backward incompatible change. Currently when
> htmleditor=true and we're reply to plain text message, the editor will
> be disabled.
>
> 4. FORWARD: Here I'm not sure, but I think editor should be set like for
> NEW/EDIT mode. When we implement "forward-as-attachment" we should set
> editor like for NEW message.

I suggest EDIT mode when forwarding.

> ps. in future we could add some per-contact format setting (like in
> Thunderbird).

What I think could be more useful (and is also at Thunderbird feature) 
is to try to figure out whether or not the composed message actually 
contains any styling, and then either send it as plain text or as 
multipart/alternative. Is it done now? If not, is it possible?

Rimas

_______________________________________________
List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
BT/aba52c80


More information about the Dev mailing list