Well, now I'm not sure. Re: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2183#section-2.8 This says ```Unrecognized disposition types should be treated as `attachment'.``` What I'm proposing essentially treats unrecognized disposition (e.g., quoted-printable) as inline. So tb is currently doing the "right thing" according to the rfc. It treats it as an attachments and, since it is text, doesn't show show it when pref mail.inline_attachments.text is at the default setting of false.
Bug 1628441 Comment 10 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
Well, now I'm not sure. Re: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2183#section-2.8 This says ```Unrecognized disposition types should be treated as `attachment'.``` What I'm proposing essentially treats unrecognized disposition (e.g., quoted-printable) as inline. So tb is currently doing the "right thing" according to the rfc. It treats it as an attachments and, since it is text, doesn't show show it when pref mail.inline_attachments.text is at the default setting of false. Edit: Then again the rfc uses the term "should" so not really a hard requirement.