I thought that the purpose of the QUOTED-PRINTABLE encoding was to deal with
potential problems with sending things such as RTF through e-mail. So this is
not an issue.
What I am dreadfully afraid of is that we will end up being damned for not
using RTF, simply because RTF, like uuencode, is already in widespread use.
For example, the mail program shipped with NeXT computers uses RTF, tar,
compress, and uuencode. It is very painful to deal with this mail on a non-
NeXT system, but groupies love it. As the author of a different, more
standard, mail program for that platform, I've received boundless abuse from
the groupies for "not following NeXT e-mail standards" (the only standards
that matter, of course -- who needs this RFC nonsense?). I can just imagine
what I'd hear if I used a rich text format that was not RTF or a imaging
format that was not TIFF.
So, I'll confess that my support of RTF is based on:
. it's standard
. it seems to have what's needed
. I won't get hate mail for using it.
-- Mark --