This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
On 2022-10-02, Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> wrote:
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)And this is a plain text response, pointing out I couldn't read a word
of your message. But hey.
That's okay. I read his message and I have no idea what he's asking
for. He doesn't mention a program or operating system, and asks for
opinions on color scheme named after a black and white photography
process, so he's likely just going to be sad.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solarization_(photography)
​I'm sorry. I don't know why Thunderbird is making my messages not-plain-text, and i don't know how to turn it off.
Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sorry. I don't know why Thunderbird is making my messages not-plain-text, and i don't know how to turn it off.
There are two things: your signature block contains UTF-8 characters,
and you have PGP signing enabled.
Your message is however properly formed, and Gnus v5.13 is able to
decode it correctly. Apparently slrn/1.0.3 isn't.
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 10:16:03 +0300
om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:
Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sorry. I don't know why Thunderbird is making my messages
not-plain-text, and i don't know how to turn it off.
There are two things: your signature block contains UTF-8 characters,
and you have PGP signing enabled.
Your message is however properly formed, and Gnus v5.13 is able to
decode it correctly. Apparently slrn/1.0.3 isn't.
My guess is that what's causing problems for some people is that
Hawk's posts are BASE64 encoded. I don't know why Thunderbird does
that but there do exist news.software.newsreaders and alt.comp.software.newsreaders for such questions.
There are two things: your signature block contains UTF-8 characters,
and you have PGP signing enabled.
Your message is however properly formed, and Gnus v5.13 is able to
decode it correctly. Apparently slrn/1.0.3 isn't.
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
My guess is that what's causing problems for some people is that
Hawk's posts are BASE64 encoded. I don't know why Thunderbird does
that but there do exist news.software.newsreaders and alt.comp.software.newsreaders for such questions.
Indeed; I took it as implied that UTF-8 characters in the signature
block causes this need for encoding, and for some reason base64 gets selected, instead of the (in this case) more frugal quoted-printable.
Followup-to: alt.comp.software.thunderbird,news.software.newsreaders,alt.comp.software.newsreaders
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:18:36 +0300 om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:
[...]
Followup-to: alt.comp.software.thunderbird,news.software.newsreaders,alt.comp.software.newsreaders
By the way , the post I'm responding to does not appear on news.aioe.org presumably because you have crossposted to too many newsgroups.
But the group "news.software.readers" exists
On 10/13/22 03:35, Otto J. Makela wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
[snip]
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solarized
[snip]
​Yes, this is the colorscheme i'm referring to, and i want something
better than it.
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 10:16:03 +0300
om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:
Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sorry. I don't know why Thunderbird is making my messages
not-plain-text, and i don't know how to turn it off.
There are two things: your signature block contains UTF-8 characters,
and you have PGP signing enabled.
Your message is however properly formed, and Gnus v5.13 is able to
decode it correctly. Apparently slrn/1.0.3 isn't.
My guess is that what's causing problems for some people is that Hawk's posts >are BASE64 encoded. I don't know why Thunderbird does that but there do exist >news.software.newsreaders and alt.comp.software.newsreaders for such >questions.
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
They are BASE64 encoded because they are MIME-packed. They are MIME-packed >> for the reasons mentioned above, that the signature contains high bit chars >> and PGP signing is enabled. When you turn PGP signing on, the signature is >> not just appended to the file but sent as a MIME enclosure. Because there >> are high bit chars, that MIME enclosure gets BASE64ed.
MIME doesn't enforce base64. quoted-printable is an option too, and a
more appropriate one for Usenet where half the clients don't seem to
have been updated since 1995.
They are BASE64 encoded because they are MIME-packed. They are MIME-packed for the reasons mentioned above, that the signature contains high bit chars and PGP signing is enabled. When you turn PGP signing on, the signature is not just appended to the file but sent as a MIME enclosure. Because there are high bit chars, that MIME enclosure gets BASE64ed.
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
They are BASE64 encoded because they are MIME-packed. They are MIME-packed for the reasons mentioned above, that the signature contains high bit chars and PGP signing is enabled. When you turn PGP signing on, the signature is not just appended to the file but sent as a MIME enclosure. Because there are high bit chars, that MIME enclosure gets BASE64ed.
MIME doesn’t enforce base64. quoted-printable is an option too, and a
more appropriate one for Usenet where half the clients don’t seem to
have been updated since 1995.
In article <Z2xjxj6GLU0cTiaJR@bongo-ra.co>,
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
My guess is that what's causing problems for some people is that Hawk's posts
are BASE64 encoded. I don't know why Thunderbird does that but there do exist
news.software.newsreaders and alt.comp.software.newsreaders for such >questions.
They are BASE64 encoded because they are MIME-packed. They are MIME-packed for the reasons mentioned above, that the signature contains high bit chars and PGP signing is enabled. When you turn PGP signing on, the signature is not just appended to the file but sent as a MIME enclosure. Because there are high bit chars, that MIME enclosure gets BASE64ed.
On 16 Oct 2022 13:18:25 -0000
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
In article <Z2xjxj6GLU0cTiaJR@bongo-ra.co>,
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
My guess is that what's causing problems for some people is that Hawk's posts
are BASE64 encoded. I don't know why Thunderbird does that but there do exist
news.software.newsreaders and alt.comp.software.newsreaders for such questions.
They are BASE64 encoded because they are MIME-packed. They are MIME-packed for the reasons mentioned above, that the signature contains high bit chars and PGP signing is enabled. When you turn PGP signing on, the signature is not just appended to the file but sent as a MIME enclosure. Because there are high bit chars, that MIME enclosure gets BASE64ed.
Is there some RFC which says that it has to be encoded ? In other words , if <thbc1u$1kurt$16@dont-email.me> had
[...]
--------------Tt8my9EQNXhQlE93lqBKz0mM
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT"
--------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hello!
I'm looking for a color scheme that's better than Solarized. While i
[...]
/blu.mɛin.dʰak/ | shortens to "Hawk" | he/him/his/himself/Mr.
[...]
--------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys; name="OpenPGP_0x0D8C69D9C42BA5C8.asc" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_0x0D8C69D9C42BA5C8.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP public key
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
[...]
, would it violate any RFC ?
Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
Is there some RFC which says that it has to be encoded ? In other words , if
<thbc1u$1kurt$16@dont-email.me> had
[...]
--------------Tt8my9EQNXhQlE93lqBKz0mM
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT"
--------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hello!
I'm looking for a color scheme that's better than Solarized. While i
[...]
/blu.mɛin.dʰak/ | shortens to "Hawk" | he/him/his/himself/Mr.
[...]
--------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys; name="OpenPGP_0x0D8C69D9C42BA5C8.asc" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_0x0D8C69D9C42BA5C8.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP public key
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
[...]
, would it violate any RFC ?
RFC 3156 says:
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3156#section-3>
|
| 3. Content-Transfer-Encoding restrictions
|
| Multipart/signed and multipart/encrypted are to be treated by agents
| as opaque, meaning that the data is not to be altered in any way [2],
| [7]. However, many existing mail gateways will detect if the next
| hop does not support MIME or 8-bit data and perform conversion to
| either Quoted-Printable or Base64. This presents serious problems
| for multipart/signed, in particular, where the signature is
| invalidated when such an operation occurs. For this reason all data
| signed according to this protocol MUST be constrained to 7 bits (8-
| bit data MUST be encoded using either Quoted-Printable or Base64).
The example above would violate the "MUST be constrained to 7 bits".
But QP transfer encoding (instead of Base64) should be allowed.
Michael Bäuerle wrote:
Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
Is there some RFC which says that it has to be encoded ? In other words , if
<thbc1u$1kurt$16@dont-email.me> had
[...]
--------------Tt8my9EQNXhQlE93lqBKz0mM
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT"
--------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hello!
I'm looking for a color scheme that's better than Solarized. While i [...]
/blu.mɛin.dʰak/ | shortens to "Hawk" | he/him/his/himself/Mr.
[...]
--------------mmNZ03EhTrk2EIAXSj0QuBYT
Content-Type: application/pgp-keys; name="OpenPGP_0x0D8C69D9C42BA5C8.asc" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_0x0D8C69D9C42BA5C8.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP public key
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
[...]
, would it violate any RFC ?
RFC 3156 says:
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3156#section-3>
|
| 3. Content-Transfer-Encoding restrictions
|
| Multipart/signed and multipart/encrypted are to be treated by agents
| as opaque, meaning that the data is not to be altered in any way [2],
| [7]. However, many existing mail gateways will detect if the next
| hop does not support MIME or 8-bit data and perform conversion to
| either Quoted-Printable or Base64. This presents serious problems
| for multipart/signed, in particular, where the signature is
| invalidated when such an operation occurs. For this reason all data
| signed according to this protocol MUST be constrained to 7 bits (8-
| bit data MUST be encoded using either Quoted-Printable or Base64).
The example above would violate the "MUST be constrained to 7 bits".
But QP transfer encoding (instead of Base64) should be allowed.
I see. That's a bummer. The same RFC says
Implementor's note: It cannot be stressed enough that applications
using this standard follow MIME's suggestion that you "be
conservative in what you generate, and liberal in what you
accept." In this particular case it means it would be wise for an
implementation to accept messages with any content-transfer-
encoding, but restrict generation to the 7-bit format required by
this memo. This will allow future compatibility in the event the
Internet SMTP framework becomes 8-bit friendly.
Given that the RFC is from 2001 , I wonder if the Internet SMTP framework
has become 8-bit friendly by now.
I'm looking for a color scheme that's better than
Solarized. While i do like Solarized (especially
the 256-color Solarized), there are a few problems
that i have with it, such as the way that the
palette fails to map to the traditional 16-color
palette and the somewhat strange imbalances in
some of the colors.
So what i'm looking for is a color scheme like
this:
-- About the same level of contrast as Solarized
-- Easily invertible, like what Solarized does
-- Maps to the traditional 16-color palette (i.e.
has bright and darks of the primaries, secon-
daries, black, and white)
-- Colors are balanced and not biased towards any
particular color (e.g. not warm- or cool-lean-
ing)
-- Doesn't make assumptions about how it will be
used (e.g. doesn't go "red should be more in-
tense because it's often used for warnings" or
some bullshit like that)
Does anyone know of something that fits the bill?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 388 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 05:37:03 |
| Calls: | 8,220 |
| Calls today: | 18 |
| Files: | 13,122 |
| Messages: | 5,872,261 |
| Posted today: | 1 |