With reference to rfc.1341.ps, headed June 1992:
Some of the Rich Text 'verbs' have subtle semantic ambiguities when self-nested.
For example, should <underline><underline> be used to delineate a double
underline? <Bold><Bold> might be usefull in a context where degrees of boldness
are possible. <Italic><Italic> probably is nonesense, but I am not willing to
bet the farm on that. My concern is not with these, which are admittedly a bit
exotic, but rather with the verbs Smaller and Bigger, where non-trivial
documents will routinely have to deal with this hierarchical nesting.
Consider the following text:
I can see 2 alternative RT representations, assuming 12pt was 'normal':
The first is more concise, and probably more elegant, but it is a bit of a pain
to support, as it requires a hierarchical history.
The second can be implemented by a simpler parser, which need only track the
most recent 'on' position, rather than a list of them, and which would also
track the depth (to use as an index into the users prefered display sizes
Mailstrom can go either way on this, I am asking you (all) for your sense of
what would constitute a proper interpretation of rfc1341.
Thank you for your time.
Dana S Emery <de19(_at_)umail(_dot_)umd(_dot_)edu>