Recently, I have noticed that “txt” attachments sent from external mail server do not appear as attachments an email, instead I can only see the text in the body of the email and no txt attachment icons are shown. Is there a way to correct this?
Subject: RE: txt. attachment problem
Solution - do not use Notes as e-mail program.
Notes is not RFC compliant sometimes. Like there is no perfection in this world
Subject: Re: Notes is not RFC compliant sometimes???
Really?
Notes is far more RFC compliant than any other MUA I use on a regular basis.
The problem is almost certainly the MIME structure of the source emails in this case. if $original_poster can post the MIME source of a sample here, we can verify this.
(hint - in Notes 6, open one of the messages that is displaying .txt “attachments” as in-line text, then use menu option View, Show, Page Source, then copy the source to the clipboard and paste it in a response to this thread)
HTH
Chris Linfoot
Subject: RE: Re: Notes is not RFC compliant sometimes???
Ever tried to exctract inline txt attachments from Notes?
look here
Subject: I agree about that but…
It is a different issue.
What $original_poster appeared to say was that Notes 6 was presenting .txt attachments as in-line text which is somewhat different to the known issue of Notes not having the option to save in-line message parts as files (as described in the thread you pointed me at).
That still looks like a sender side MIME issue to me.
Tried a test, sending a .txt attachment to myself using a POP client. Said .txt file was delivered as an attachment with MIME structure quite clearly showing it as such.
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0035_01C33420.D3795D50"
------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C33420.D3795D50
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
there is a .txt file attached here
------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C33420.D3795D50
Content-Type: text/plain;
name="example.txt"
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="example.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
So $original_poster’s problem could be a problem with Content-Disposition or with the Content-Type of the message (multipart/mixed, multipart/related, multipart/alternative…
Naming no names, but other popular MUAs are known to be less than wholly reliable where these matters are concerned ![]()