My resistance broke down. I can live with rfc-xxxx, in fact I think
it's excellent. But,
1) I don't think Table 2 "defines" US-ASCII. A character set Content-type
should define the sequence of glyphs the users sees and the rectangular
arrangement thereof. I think you need to make some comment on DEL and
the characters before SPACE. I would say something like this
"The control characters and delete have no defined meaning apart from
the combination <CR><LF> indicating a new line. Two of the characters
have defacto meanings in wide use: <FF> as the first character of a
line means "start this line on the beginning of a new page"; and
<TAB> means "move the cursor to the next available position 8n+1
after the next postion". Apart from this any use of the control
characters or DEL in a message must be part of a private agreement
between the sender and recipient. Such private agreements are discouraged
and should be replaced by the other capabilities of rfc-xxxx."
2) I like the name=value parameters in the binary Content-type. I would
like to see it used for all the Content-types. E.g. multipart would become
Content-type: multipart; version=1; presentation=serial; marker=Qxy2oPxreRtDF
I would like all the Content-types to have a version paramter, but it should
default to version=1 if absent so that it will probably never be seen.
Bob Smart