ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Richmail

1991-06-05 06:03:04
    Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1991 15:41 PDT
    From: "Ned Freed, Postmaster" <NED(_at_)hmcvax(_dot_)claremont(_dot_)edu>
    Subject: Re: Richmail
    To: janssen(_at_)parc(_dot_)xerox(_dot_)com
    Cc: ietf-822(_at_)dimacs(_dot_)rutgers(_dot_)edu
    
    ...

    The problem is that everyone is objecting to Richmail on the basis
    that it might be objectionable to someone else, or is objecting to
    it because some other format might possibly be better. Let's cut to
    the chase, please, and propose specific alternatives and specify
    what they are. You've proposed TeX and SGML and ODA, and these are
    formats which I happen to know enough about to form an intelligent
    response with no additional information. RTF is still a possible
    contender -- I'm waiting to see what it really is.

    I feel that Richmail is an extremely important facility to have and
    I don't want to get rid of it for such non-reasons as these.

I think everyone agrees that a RichText format of some form is very
useful, but surely the definition doesn't belong in RFC-XXXX.

Bob Kummerfeld.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>