Re: Comments on Draft RFC

I like the "822-message" and "audio" content-type ideas.


Please don't include an "audio" content type unless there a specific standard
referenced.  There are lots of different types of audio codings and just
saying "audio" will get us the same place we are today with "text".

Tom Morris

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, (continued) Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, Einar Stefferud Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, David Herron Re: multiple Content-Encoding:'s, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: what should Content-Encoding cover?, Bill Janssen Re: what should Content-Encoding cover?, Erik E. Fair Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Neil Katin Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Tom Morris - Digital Equipment - Valbonne, France 25-Apr-1991 1542 <= Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Vincent Lau Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Greg Vaudreuil Re: Content-Label, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Content-Label, Einar Stefferud Re: Content-Label, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Content-Label, Einar Stefferud Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Neil Katin Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Ned Freed, Postmaster

Previous by Date:	Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein
Next by Date:	Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein
Previous by Thread:	Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein
Next by Thread:	Re: Comments on Draft RFC, Nathaniel Borenstein
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]