Closed
Bug 883932
Opened 11 years ago
Closed 5 years ago
inline images not displayed when referenced in HTML part with name instead of cid:
Categories
(Thunderbird :: Untriaged, enhancement)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
INVALID
People
(Reporter: davidmaxwaterman, Unassigned)
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
196.06 KB,
text/plain
|
Details |
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/21.0 (Beta/Release) Build ID: 20130512193848 Steps to reproduce: I received an email, apparently sent using Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000 (according to the X-Mailer header). The email is in html and contains inline images referenced with <img> elements with src set as as a filename, and the attachment (which has a correct Content-Type of image/png) has the same filename as a 'name' in the Content-Type header, and as a 'filename' in the Content-Disposition header. I had them send a simple email from the same system and saved it to an .eml file, and edited the email addresses, hostnames, and ip addresses out...hopefully it is still useful to figure out this problem. The relevant parts : <IMG id="Picture 1" src="d0176599-66b6-4266-b625-1b33c4b206ee.png" width=396 height=223> and Content-Type: image/png; charset="utf-8"; name="d0176599-66b6-4266-b625-1b33c4b206ee.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <121dbd5e-15af-4ff5-9355-42e54bcba13f> Content-Disposition: inline; filename="d0176599-66b6-4266-b625-1b33c4b206ee.png" Actual results: broken image is displayed in the message and the file is shown as an attachment Expected results: While I am reliably informed that this style of referencing attachments is not according to the standard, I would expect Thunderbird to accommodate this, especially since it is almost certainly quite trivial and doing so will make the use of Thunderbird in the enterprise somewhat less painful.
Updated•11 years ago
|
Severity: normal → enhancement
Summary: inline images not displayed → inline images not displayed when referenced in HTML part with name instead of cid:
Comment 1•11 years ago
|
||
I assume using the name (found in content-type) instead of cid:... when referencing img src from HTML is really non-standard, and probably non-standard enough to *not* accommodate for it in TB. We really can't iron out all the problems caused by non-standards-compliant mailers, especially now that TB is maintained by volunteer community.
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•11 years ago
|
||
I think it is non-standard, but if TB wants to get any traction inside organisations using FOSS with Microsoft Exchange/etc, then I think it should be considered seriously. It's easy to just claim 'non-standard', and it's a valid argument, but it surely would be much easier for TB to support this (and then have more and more people not use Microsoft tools) than to get Microsoft to use standard methods. FYI, in this case, I am a s/w engineer inside Intel's Open-source Technology Centre (OTC) and Microsoft Exchange/Outlook are the most-used mailers outside OTC, so many wide-audience messages are not rendered correctly by TB. This makes it impossible to recommend TB even to people inside OTC (where it is likely most readily accepted). Can I assume that supporting the above method doesn't actually break any standard compliance? If so, I personally think it is worth the effort (though it isn't *my* effort, admittedly).
Updated•5 years ago
|
Attachment #763654 -
Attachment mime type: application/octet-stream → text/plain
Comment 3•5 years ago
|
||
The image references some external URL: <IMG width="1" height="1" border="0" alt="" src="http://somedomain.com/TMService/Anonymous/open.aspx?ID=1203435"> And there is an image attachment which TB shows as attachment. It's incorrectly classified as inline. Content-Type: image/png; charset="utf-8"; name="d0176599-66b6-4266-b625-1b33c4b206ee.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <121dbd5e-15af-4ff5-9355-42e54bcba13f> Content-Disposition: inline; filename="d0176599-66b6-4266-b625-1b33c4b206ee.png" They are not related. This bug is invalid.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 5 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•