Re: url issues

[Stefan]

> * I think this change is the wrong thing to do, and that
>   `mm-insert-part' should be used instead.  If that doesn't work right
>   it can be fixed -- I'm not sure it DTRT in terms of setting
>   `last-coding-system-used' &c.

Maybe using mm-insert-part would be preferable, but at least I think my
change is correct in the sense that it gets the behavior closer to
the ideal.  I no nothing about mm-insert-part.

Does mm-insert-part pay attention to -*- coding: foo -*- and to file
name extension?  These were the motivating reason for my change.

Any patch using mm-insert-part might be welcome as long as it still obeys
coding cookies an filename extensions.

>   (A comment in the code mentions `the locale in use at the remote
>   site'; but that shouldn't be relevant.  What's important is the
>   specified charset -- or the default, if it's not specified,
>   e.g. Latin-1 for text/html as far as I remember.)

Of course.  I meant that the charset specified could be used but shouldn't
be trusted since in practice it's much too often just "the default charset
implied by the locale under which the http server is running" without paying
much attention to the file itself.


        Stefan


PS: Haven't had time to look at the rest of your points.  If you could do
those changes yourself, it would be great.