Re: Comments on Draft RFC

I agree that the perfix and postfix stuff needs to be very clear, else
people will use it with bad effects, as noted by Vincent.

I also agree that "content-label" and "message-id" are quite different
in look and feel.  Also, does not Message-ID require some specific
formatting and content per RFC822?  Guaranteed unique and such...

Best...\Stef

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Comments on Draft RFC, Vincent Lau Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Einar Stefferud Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: compressed as Content-Encoding, rather than Content-Type, Bill Janssen Re: compressed as Content-Encoding, rather than Content-Type, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Bill Janssen Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Vincent Lau Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Einar Stefferud <= Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Comments on Draft RFC, David Herron Re: UUencode, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: UUencode, David Herron Re: UUencode, David Herron Re: UUencode, Nathaniel Borenstein multiple Content-Encoding:'s, David Herron Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, Greg Vaudreuil Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, Nathaniel Borenstein

Previous by Date:	Re: Comments on Draft RFC, David Herron
Next by Date:	Re: compressed as Content-Encoding, rather than Content-Type, Bill Janssen
Previous by Thread:	Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Vincent Lau
Next by Thread:	Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]