All users were logged out of Bugzilla on October 13th, 2018

Should have more proper (official) custom mime-type for mail messages



18 years ago
10 years ago


(Reporter: bugzilla, Assigned: braden)



Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)




18 years ago
text/nsmessage isn't the proper format.  See jag's comment in bug 55902.  
Looking for the rfc on this...


18 years ago
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.0

Comment 1

18 years ago
I believe text/nsmessage is only used for drag 'n drop. The rest of mail is
using text/rfc822, which is a standard type. Drag 'n drop is a private API, and
to the best of my knowledge does not expose mime types anywhere outside of
mozilla itself... so this is not as critical as a typical "we're not following
standards" issue.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Comment 2

18 years ago
adding rhp and ducarroz to the CC since they are the MIME and Mail Compose

Comment 3

18 years ago
I hope you mean "message/rfc822".

Can DnD not use message/rfc822 like the rest of mail? Does it require a distinct

If this is only used internally, registering a type in the public namespace is
not the Right Thing. However, if Mozilla would choke if the type
"text/nsmessage" were to be used on the Internet for some other purpose, it's
not the Right Thing either.

One option would be to use a type in the experimental namespace; for instance,
"message/x.vnd.mozilla.dnd". Another would be to avoid relying on a MIME type
altogether. I imagine the first of those options would be much easier to
implement; the latter can always be implemented later if it's deemed necessary.

Comment 4

18 years ago
(yes, I meant message/rfc822)
We can't use message/rfc822 because the data that is being dragged is NOT the
whole message - i.e. the data is not in the message/rfc822 format. We're
dragging just enough information to be able to get at the message when the drop

 I'm not actually sure what format the message is in though. If it's just a URL
or URI, then we should be using text/x-moz-url or whatever we're going to call
it, and we probably don't need text/nsmessage. I have a feeling that there might
be something else in the string that requires us to use a seperate flavor.

Comment 5

18 years ago
So, does anything need to be done here?

Comment 6

18 years ago
silence == no.  reopen if so and explain in detail...
Last Resolved: 18 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX

Comment 8

18 years ago
Sorry I'm late. *Something* needs to be done here; what, I'm not entirely sure.

First, "nsmessage" is simply inappropriate for Mozilla. Second, it is
inappropriate to use a media type name in the IETF namespace for private
functionality. At least we should use something in the experimental namespace;
ideally we shouldn't be using something that looks like a MIME media type at

The first step, though, is to get some concrete answers to the questions alecf's
comments pose.
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---

Comment 9

18 years ago
Okay.  Reassigning to you to get those answers.
Assignee: blakeross → braden

Comment 10

18 years ago
Given that I'm not familiar with the mail-news code and it could be a while
before I can spare the cycles to look at code decorated with ns*, I may not be
the most appropriate assignee. I'd imagine that a mail-news developer could
address this faster and more efficiently than I, but I can accept if necessary.
cc'ing putterman.

Comment 12

18 years ago
oh for goodness sake, this is getting absurd.
No we're changing things just for the sake of changing things.
1) there's nothing wrong with nsmessage - we use "ns" all over the codebase.
2) there's nothing wrong with using an IETF mime type - it's private, that's the
point. if our data format happens to match an IETF approved mime time, there's
no reason not to use it.


Comment 13

18 years ago
ns* is a problem. I thought this bug aimed to be part of the solution. I may
have been mistaken.

The problem with using a name in the IETF namespace--really, the problem with
using something that looks like an MIME content type where a MIME content type
isn't called for--is that it creates confusion. The fact that this bug report
exists is the proof of that.

A sensible name would eliminate confusion.

Comment 14

17 years ago
Bugs targeted at mozilla1.0 without the mozilla1.0 keyword moved to mozilla1.0.1 
(you can query for this string to delete spam or retrieve the list of bugs I've 
Target Milestone: mozilla1.0 → mozilla1.0.1

Comment 15

15 years ago
Heh. The string "text/nsmessage" seems no longer to appear in the codebase. 
Last Resolved: 18 years ago15 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
Product: MailNews → Core
Product: Core → MailNews Core
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.