Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
Actually, I sympathize with the view that there shouldn't be an escape
mechanism inside text/enriched that says "treat everything as plain text
until the next </verbatim>". I still need to be able to specify that a
certain block of text be displayed exactly so, with no filling, justifying,
or indent. But I can live with having to encode certain characters (like
less-than) within that environment.
I believe earlier discussion on this list had come to the consensus
that a "nofill" command was useful, independently of whether
"verbatim" was kept.
sdorner(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com (Steve Dorner) writes:
After all the pain and suffering I've gone through for the MIME support
I've done, I find a certain amount of irony in the complaint that verbatim
"adds DOZENS of lines of code to my parser."
Code size is not the complaint. Unnecessary complexity, which leads
to bugs and interoperability problems, is the complaint. Increased
code size is an indication of complexity, as is the number of bugs I
found in the sample parser.
I have to say it is my impression that since the publication of RFC
1341, the ietf-822 WG has contracted a bad case of second system
syndrome. It is hard to point to a particular feature and say "this
is the straw that will break the camel's back", but there are places
where one can try to point out where the loss of simplicity is not
adequately compensated for by gain in functionality.
_.John G. Myers Internet: jgm+(_at_)CMU(_dot_)EDU