Excerpts from mail: 24-Oct-91 Re: SPEAK NOW OR HOLD YOUR .. Ned
Freed(_at_)HMCVAX(_dot_)CLAREMO (2001)
(1) I would like to see some alignment between the charsets it supports and
the ones RFC-XXXX allows in the body of a message. This is both a
present-day functional desire (align them now) as well as a future
procedural desire (adding a character set in the future should make it
possible to use it in both the header and the body of a message.
Yeah, well if it became part of RFC-XXXX they could simply be the same
set of character sets.
(2) Numbering things is fine but I want the ability to name them as well.
Currently, in Keith's draft you can do it either way. I'm still uneasy
with the numbering, and would prefer only naming, but will back down
gracefully if outvoted.
(3) I don't like the yet another encoding problem it raises. If we need to
change quoted-printable to align it with the needs of headers, we should
change it NOW. (Note that this in particular requires a change in RFC-XXXX
and not in Keith's proposal.) Is there any problem with replacing the :
with an =?
If nobody objects, and if this really solves the problem, I will happily
change : to = as the q-p special character. Fortunately, most of my
test applications have been using base64 anyway... :-)