Preamble:
This issue may get complicated. It's not a bug report, but at this stage just an appeal and attempt to understand the logic. Maybe Roundcube 1.0-git is doing it all correct, but maybe not.
The issue:
I received a message, produced with Roundcube 0.8.1, that contained the following quoted paragraph (without the dashed lines):
Mal was ganz anderes zwischendurch: Es ist ja jetzt bei der Telekom die Rede davon, zukünftig ab einer bestimmten Datenmenge den Durchsatz zu drosseln.
Three things are important to note upfront:
- The quote above is taken from the message source, not from the display
within Roundcube.
- Lines #1 and #3 of this quote have a trailing blank (20d) in the original
message (verified by saving it locally and looking at it with a hex editor). The message you are currently reading will not have these trailing blanks, as Roundcube 1.0-git does eliminate all trailing blanks prior to an EOL upon sending (no matter if the format is flowed or not). Which is a good idea, IMO, but apparently different to the behaviour of 0.8.1.
- The message is declared as charset=UTF-8, format=flowed and CTE 8bit (not
sure if this does play any role here).
The quote above is displayed in 1.0-git [GIT 20130503.1233] like this:
Mal was ganz anderes zwischendurch: Es ist ja jetzt bei der Telekom die Rede davon, zukünftig ab einer bestimmten Datenmenge den Durchsatz zu drosseln.
So the LF right after "zu " in Line #3 is being eliminated in the display, probably because of the trailing blank in line #3...?
But if that should be the reason, why then isn't the LF in line #1, right after "Telekom " being eliminated as well...?
So much to the display. Upon replying to this message, 1.0-git will will re-wrap the quoted paragraph like this (although I always trusted in that Roundcube wouldn't do any re-wrapping of quoted paragraphs):
Mal was ganz anderes zwischendurch: Es ist ja jetzt bei der Telekom die Rede davon, zukünftig ab einer bestimmten Datenmenge den Durchsatz zu drosseln.
Here, BOTH LFs in line #1 and #3 (with trailing blanks) are being eliminated, not only the one in line #3. So we have just two lines.
Which does of course look much more nice than the quote of the original message. But what is the logic behind this, and why is the display logic different to the reply/quote logic?
Furthermore, I'm not sure if re-wrapping of already quoted paragraphs is a good idea in all cases (in the case above it is, of course). If I think about plain text tables, ASCII art and such, this may become a mess (needs more testing).
Apparently the current behaviour is related to those trailing blanks right before EOL, and probably to format=flowed as well (not sure for the latter).
Any response welcome and appreciated.
P.S.: Sreenshots of display, editor quote and/or hex code of the original message can be sent, if so required.
Cheers,
Michael Heydekamp Co-Admin freexp.de Düsseldorf/Germany