I guess that I have no problem with using RFC-XXXX to transport SGML
documents, but I'd hate to see people interpret "richmail"
as "arbitrary SGML". I'd like to see other
content-types defined for the purpose, e.g. "text-plus/sgml-dtd-foo".
If you write the doc carefully, I think this is an excellent solution.
One would then have "richmail", plus
text-plus/sgml-dtd-foo *and*
text-plus/sdif
And a more-or-less clear rule that one of the two above, and not
"richmail", were the appropriate models for transporting "real" SGML
documents.
I was obviously just trying to overload things a bit too much.
("Nathaniel-mail"???!!!???)
Well, in the tradition of the very useful Crispin-is-a-fool
placeholder for a concept we needed to get right before agreeing on a
name, I thought this was deserved and appropriate. :-)
--john