I had the impression at one time that we were bulding a system of
indentifiers that let us cascade a set of processes to be applied to
various body part objects. Now, I seem to see a proliferation of
singular compound content-type attribute values.
I'm still not convinced on the "Codeset" issue -- it seems to me that
the set of cases where the content-type does not specify a character set
is very small, and can be handled, if necessary, by multiple
content-types, e.g. "troff-iso-10646".
So, do we also have "TeX-iso-10646" and "SCRIBE'iso-10646" ad nauseum?
Where do all these get registered, and who decides what they mean?
Does this group have to stay in sesion forever to decide these things?
I think that a natural analogy to the 822-message you propose is a
"compressed-message" content-type, which contains a compressed
encapsulated message which may, using its own content-type, contain any
other content-type. If we take this approach, we can keep
content-encoding simple *and* avoid separate compression-related headers.
This is more of what is bothering me...
Do we need to pre-define every possible combination that people will use?
Cheers...\Stef