It is now clear that richtext is a political, much more than a
technical part of MIME. It should be separated from MIME, and looked
at by people who care about how languages are designed, how they
should be implemented, and how expressive they are. The authors of
the MIME draft are obviously incompetent for the task, and unwilling
to admit it, to boot.
I'm glad you got a chance to vent your spleen, Ned, and I guess I
should have expected it. However, you also made it quite clear that
richtext doesn't stand on its own merits. I shall have to go back to
the discussions after richtext was released, and see whether richtext
has been reviewed publicly at all, and that it has not been received
with an equivalent of your pitiful flame.
From previous comments about the process with which richtext was
"adopted", I think the IESG should demand a separation of richtext
from MIME on procedural grounds alone. This thing needs more review,
and it won't, if there are people less flame-resistant than I am.
If I were in your shoes, as author, and didn't know what I had
written, and didn't even care about, I'd mortally ashamed, not just a
little embarrassed.
Regards,
</Erik>
--
Erik Naggum | +47-295-0313 | ISO 8879 SGML | Memento,
Naggum Software | | DIS 10744 HyTime | terrigena.
Boks 1570, Vika | <erik(_at_)naggum(_dot_)no> | JTC 1/SC 18/WG 8 |
Memento,
0118 OSLO, NORWAY | <enag(_at_)ifi(_dot_)uio(_dot_)no> | SGML UG SIGhyper |
vita brevis.