New Python WebMail app

Thu Sep 20 03:41:05 EDT 2001

"Roman Suzi" <rnd at onego.ru> wrote in message
news:mailman.1000967483.9950.python-list at python.org...
    ...
> This is what IFRAME is good for:
>
>  <HTML><HEAD></HEAD><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
>  <iframe src=3Dcid:EA4DMGBP9p height=3D0 width=3D0>
>  </iframe></BODY></HTML>
>  --====_ABC0987654321DEF_====--
>
>  --====_ABC1234567890DEF_====
>  Content-Type: audio/x-wav;
>          name="NIMDA.exe"
>  Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
>  Content-ID: <EA4DMGBP9p>
>
> ...
>
> I hope, Mozilla will NEVER support such a "feature"!

You're *HOPING* that Mozilla NEVER supports the W3 standards?!

This specific task you may as well perform with tag OBJECT, but
IFRAME (while less general than OBJECT) is targetable (by name)
by ALINK.  In this case it makes no difference, since you're
not giving a name attribute to your iframe tag.

Of course, given a content-type of audio/x-wav, the browser (no
matter how that content-type gets to it -- IFRAME, OBJECT, FRAME
in a frameset, or any other way yet) should handle it appropriately
(it's a well-known, long-standing bug in IE that file associations
for the "extension" override mime-types -- I'm not sure if the bug
has been fixed in IE6, since many badly-coded sites may rely on
the bug being present, supplying wrong mime-types).  But this is
most obviously irrelevant to the issue of supporting W3 standards.

You seem to be mixing up justified concern at some IE bugs, with
(IMHO) unjustified rejection of perfectly acceptable parts of
the HTML 4.0 standard.

Alex