Hal referred to Donna's list as including ...

>one contributor ... able to send (at least) Word and PDF files as
>attachments [potentially joining their messages in being] presumably
>distributed to everyone on the list whose email [doesn't get in the way].

The "presumably distributed" part is what I'm most unsure about; I too see
no direct connection between the sending of Word and PDF files and the
sending or receipt of HTML.

He also wrote in part:

>The sample headers were for a message successfully sent with attachments
>by that subscriber

Maybe, but I have been taking Donna's "No one else on the list gets
attachments through" to mean that no one else reports receiving them,
at least as such; in that case, mightn't Lotus Notes be pointing out
false positives (for the presence of attachments per se) to the person
whose sample header she quoted?

My theory is that the specific message at least was sent enclosed in HTML
tags, not as or with an attachment, and also that either (1) Donna's header
did not yet include a "language= nohtml" line when the problem last showed
itself or (2) such a line won't intercept a message whose tags, if any,
don't affect the styling of the content (a scenario whose viability or lack
thereof Francoise may care to comment on).


Chuck Brandstater
[log in to unmask]