Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralPortable MacsHardwareNetworking
Applications
Mac ApplicationsEudoraFirefox / MozillaInternet ExplorerOutlook ExpressMS OfficeEntourageExcelPowerPointWordVirtual PCMedia PlayerOther MS Products
Programming
Mac ProgrammingCodeWarriorPerl
Country Specific
Australian Mac GroupUK Mac Group

Mac Forum / Applications / Eudora / September 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Appended files: Inserting versus attaching?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
AES - 18 Sep 2007 18:22 GMT
In Eudora, I sometimes insert an external file (PDF, JPG, etc) into the
body of a message by dragging and dropping it there (especially when
it's short, or when being able to view it directly in the email client
while reading the message will be convenient for the recipient).

Or I more often drag it into the Attachments: header line (when it's
lengthy, or the recipient may or may not want to open it immediately).

Or I've been known to do both (for no really good reason, I guess).

Most recipients seem to be able to handle either method, though some
have trouble with the inserted approach.

Would anyone want to point to, or post, a short tutorial on the relative
merits of, and differences between, the insert and attach methods, e.g.:

1)  Are they really handled differently in any major way in the SMTP
mail protocol?  Is the "Insert" mode really an "attachment" also?

2)  If the "Trash attachments when message is deleted" is set, does that
trash both attachments and inserts?

3)  Is one or the other approach strongly preferred?  (and why?)  Are
there any major email clients that can handle one but not the other?

Thanks for any educational responses . . .
John H Meyers - 18 Sep 2007 22:56 GMT
> In Eudora, I sometimes insert an external file (PDF, JPG, etc) into the
> body of a message by dragging and dropping it there (especially when
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Or I more often drag it into the Attachments: header line (when it's
> lengthy, or the recipient may or may not want to open it immediately).

> Would anyone want to point to, or post, a short tutorial on the relative
> merits of, and differences between, the insert and attach methods...

When you drag a file to the "middle of a message,"
does something appear where you were pointing,
or does the path always appear in the "Attached:" header?

For me it does _only_ the latter, even if an "image" file.

To "embed" within a message, I have to either "paste"
(from clipboard) or "Edit" > "Insert" (various objects).

--
John H Meyers - 18 Sep 2007 22:59 GMT
Oops -- I only just noticed which forum this was in!

My observation applies only to Windows; no idea about Mac version!

Sorry, and hope you get some Mac info!

--
AES - 20 Sep 2007 05:12 GMT
> When you drag a file to the "middle of a message,"
> does something appear where you were pointing,
> or does the path always appear in the "Attached:" header?

PDFs, gifs, tiffs, and jpgs appear in the message window, at the
insertion point just prior to the drag and drop.  For other file types
(doc, rtf, nb, etc), the path goes into the Attached: header.
John H Meyers - 20 Sep 2007 17:37 GMT
> PDFs, gifs, tiffs, and jpgs appear in the message window, at the
> insertion point just prior to the drag and drop.  For other file types
> (doc, rtf, nb, etc), the path goes into the Attached: header.

As Bill Cole mentioned, the principal difference between an
"embedded" vs. "attached" file is whether its "disposition"
is indicated as "inline" vs. "attached" -- "inline" files
are intended to be displayed within the message,
while "attached" files are intended to be opened separately,
usually by another application.

The Windows version of Eudora responds only to "paste"
or a special "insert" operation to insert "inline" or "embedded" files,
while apparently you can "drag and drop" images and even PDFs
directly into the body of a Mac-composed message.

One can also "drag and drop" to the header section in Windows,
which also always attaches; I don't know whether the Mac versions
do the same, but it would be easy for you to find out
whether you can choose between "embedded" vs. "attached"
simply by where you drag it to.

--
Bill Cole - 19 Sep 2007 14:24 GMT
> In Eudora, I sometimes insert an external file (PDF, JPG, etc) into the
> body of a message by dragging and dropping it there (especially when
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> 1)  Are they really handled differently in any major way in the SMTP
> mail protocol?  

No. SMTP does not deal with message structure. there are occasionally
cases where a SMTP server needs to re-encode a message, but even then
the structure is not (at least in principle) changed.

> Is the "Insert" mode really an "attachment" also?

Yes.

Eudora does inline images by attaching the image and creating a small
HTML part referencing it.

Another method that can work for inlining images (and that you may be
able to tweak Eudora into doing with some obscure setting) differs from
attaching an image only by the attachment part having a header like this:

  Content-Disposition: inline

instead of this:

  Content-Disposition: attachment

> 2)  If the "Trash attachments when message is deleted" is set, does that
> trash both attachments and inserts?

Yes.

> 3)  Is one or the other approach strongly preferred?  (and why?)  Are
> there any major email clients that can handle one but not the other?

There are some mail clients that don't do HTML mail at all, so they
won't display an inline image from Eudora inline, but even most of those
will mostly offer up the image as an attachment.

In general, it is better to stick to plain text mail with attachments
instead of HTML mail with inline images unless you really need more
complex layout in your message. Beyond the issue of some clients not
really understanding HTML at all, there is a very real risk of delivery
issues from using HTML in mail. Spam filtering systems are far more
likely to mis-identify HTML messages as spam, especially when the HTML
only exists to embed an inline image.

Signature

Now where did I hide that website...

David Morrison - 24 Sep 2007 22:14 GMT
> > 3)  Is one or the other approach strongly preferred?  (and why?)  Are
> > there any major email clients that can handle one but not the other?
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> likely to mis-identify HTML messages as spam, especially when the HTML
> only exists to embed an inline image.

Maybe a problem I have is related to this. When I send a PDF to a friend using
Outlook, the attachment seems to disappear. Would it be more successful if I
inserted the file rather than attaching it?

Cheers

David

(Yes, I really should try it I suppose.)
Bill Cole - 25 Sep 2007 05:33 GMT
> > > 3)  Is one or the other approach strongly preferred?  (and why?)  Are
> > > there any major email clients that can handle one but not the other?
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> Outlook, the attachment seems to disappear. Would it be more successful if I
> inserted the file rather than attaching it?

That's likely due to a known Outlook bug:
http://www.eudora.com/techsupport/kb/2453hq.html

I think the real issue is that the user needs to update his Outlook.
Like, maybe, to Evolution.

( No, I don't know that Evolution is a real solution. I do know that
Outlook is a steaming pile of crap.)

Signature

Now where did I hide that website...

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.