I am one of the people that John Klensin was talking about
when he mentioned people concentrating on the part of MIME
that most interests them. That part is the multilingual
capabilities. I have not spent very much time concerned
about RichText and have no future plans to send RichText
or any analogous format.
That aside, I've listened to a lot of comments expressing
concern that RichText might need more than editorial changes
after we get more operational experience with it. I don't
know how loosely "editorial changes" is defined. I don't
really know whether the current comments are all well founded
or not -- and I expect that operational experience is really
the best way to find out. Given that my main interest is in
the MIME architecture and non-RichText capabilities, I would
NOT want the MIME architecture to be held up by non-editorial
changes to RichText.
Could someone in the know (Greg ?) please comment on whether
the kinds of changes being discussed would be considered
"editorial" or not ? If not, then I don't care if MIME and
RichText are in the same document. If they might be non-
trivial, then I strongly prefer that RichText be pulled into
a separate document to proceed in parallel with possible
revisions not being a potential obstacle to MIME as a whole.
Ran
atkinson(_at_)itd(_dot_)nrl(_dot_)navy(_dot_)mil