DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version
	:content-type;
	b=pW3GiNdDjNUnx4+MoBzf7dACF/Gl0+yo/cPiYmqTkKu/3+97Tb0LIWjdT4kBQRedUE
	XFZQ6jIca1bjPX5k8aBYOD9lB93YNzthltiQMoWR4lX9ubrrZ3AggqECp07LqQcAA5LU
	VYC5pGibPuS0/Yrg/GIbEeQGDQhF+NjzzZ8f4=
Sender: Albin Stjerna <albin.stjerna@gmail.com>
From: Albin Stjerna <albin@eval.nu>
To: notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Cc: 
Subject: Hiding HTML mime-parts and/or scrubbing (gmail's) HTML-based citation
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-11-g7ae1494 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 19:19:52 +0100
Message-ID: <878vx8c4on.fsf@hecate.student.uu.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello, notmuch list!

I've noticed many email clients (gmail most notably) send all mails=E2=80=
=94even
when strictly unnecessary=E2=80=94both as html and as plain text MIME, maki=
ng
them harder to read in standard (Emacs) notmuch=E2=80=94you get each message
two times!

Also, the html view doesn't handle citing very well, which is really bad
in the gmail case, since gmail encourages top-posting and ever-growing
stacks of citation through its design. And those aren't fun to scroll
through, to say the least. Also, I've seen a lot of encoding problems
with the html mime parts (umlauts replaced with =C2=BB?=C2=AB for example).

However, I do not want to hide /all/ html mime parts, since I'm
following a lot of RSS feeds through sluk, which sends them as (only)
html email (and no plain text).

As far as I can tell, there's two solutions to this:
1. not showing the html mime part if there's also a plain-text part or
2. teaching notmuch's citation-scrubbing feature (hook?) to recognize
   citations in html as well, most urgently gmail's.

Have any of these two solutions been attempted by anyone?

Thanks in advance,
 Albin

P.S. I'm sorry I first sent this email from the wrong address, I think
I've cancelled my waiting for moderator approval now.

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJNY/5IAAoJENEsx6vBGurCNl8H/1GwJ+CETqp//OHN1vyK753q
CJbgP+6lf0ER7uX/ZiKjZEJMe3LBtb96JtS1tnnA2rXFX/wOXUfahRNkcQ3EAMVp
usucqwlHu0GWhha3eNNt5jK6ZO8jwpzXbrzJAvng92/sWi+SZvu9GjoVbVRLSK5D
eyXGk62txIc5eSVf+Y+cd+izTDhGObCpokhIDc6xVNGFEiPVmgNfltOV+Qwmcnkw
Rt3dLcSF8YahKP4vDrg0sR+EyAoT6ZyZ4wzl1xXnhIB7UPVXTzpzTR7gj+0gOW53
QVHWt68bHogZIbidt6f1GpyZc1f21Jv51BghosX5NN81K/gNTaIQIdQNKpHlOqQ=
=/QkX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--