Re: [ietf-smtp] [Proposal] 250-MARKDOWN

[Gilles Chehade <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 02:12:39PM +0530, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote:
> Please take a look here.
> https://gist.github.com/mistergiri/603766f5295802d44cc1a5752ebfa21f#steps-need-to-be-taken
> 
> But it is a flawed proposal.
> 

I read it, but the following doesn't make sense to me:

	Sender should transfer the mail in "text/markdown" if the receiver support that format (250-MARKDOWN).
	Else they can go for multipart/alternative with "text/plain" and "text/html" format as usual.

What's the original content type for the mail here ?

There are multiple ways to understand this depending on what is the type
of the mail to start with. In one case, it might imply that servers need
to convert text/* to text/markdown based on a peer extension, in another
it implies that a text/markdown content should be converted to plain and
html parts, etc...

In cases were no transforms are required in either way, then I don't see
how a session with or without MARKDOWN would differ.

That being said, and as mentioned in another mail, SMTP is for transport
and I think having content-related informations spill in the protocol is
a violation of layers.


> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 2:08 PM Gilles Chehade <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 01:10:34PM +0530, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > What happens if my mail server doesn't support markdown?
> > >
> > >
> > > That's why I'm proposing the MARKDOWN extension. MARKDOWN command should
> > be
> > > presented in the EHLO response only if your server supports markdown.
> > >
> > > If your server supports markdown, the mail will be transferred as
> > > text/markdown. Else mail will be transferred as "text/plain" and
> > > "text/html" as usual.
> > >
> > > I hope I understood you correctly.
> > >
> >
> > still unsure I understand how it works, sorry
> >
> > my understanding now is that the server translates DATA between markdown
> > and other content types based on MARKDOWN extension at peer.
> >
> > did i understand correctly ?
> >
> >
> > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 1:03 PM <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 09 Jan 2019 12:29:43 +0530, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan said:
> > > >
> > > > > I wanna bring Markdown support to SMTP.  So instead of transferring
> > both
> > > > > "text/plain" and "text/html" versions, future mails can use only
> > > > > "text/markdown".
> > > >
> > > > Well, right off the top, there's the end to end problem.
> > > >
> > > > Say you support text/markdown, and your mail server accepts it to
> > deliver.
> > > > What
> > > > happens if my mail server doesn't support markdown?  Do you send a
> > > > text/markdown
> > > > and hope my MUA can deal with it? If you do that, why bother with an
> > SMTP
> > > > intervention?
> > > >
> > > > Also, see RFC1341, and text/richtext. Ask yourself why you never see
> > > > e-mails with it.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
> > > Dombox, Inc.
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ietf-smtp mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp
> >
> >
> > --
> > Gilles Chehade                                                 @poolpOrg
> >
> > https://www.poolp.org                 tip me: https://paypal.me/poolpOrg
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
> Dombox, Inc.

-- 
Gilles Chehade						       @poolpOrg

https://www.poolp.org                 tip me: https://paypal.me/poolpOrg