Excerpts from mail: 4-Mar-92 Re: Showstopper from EUnet .. Keld J|rn
Simonsen(_at_)dkuug (1334)
Well, I would have thought that you, Nathaniel would understand
our position. Our arguments are very much in line with your
arguments for keeping RichText in MIME.
Yes, they're almost exactly the same reasons, which is why I have
supported MNEMONIC in MIME. However, unlike MNEMONIC, richtext has NO
dependencies on things that are not standards-ready. And I have
publicly stated on MANY occasions that if necessary I would accept
moving richtext to a separate RFC in order to get MIME out the door.
That has not, however, proven necessary. Had the IESG bounced richtext
for as clear and well-explained a reason as it bounced mnemonic, I don't
think I'd be arguing, and I'm SURE I wouldn't be calling it a
show-stopper, since I have made it clear in the past that, much as I
prefer having richtext in MIME, its exclusion was not a show-stopper for
me.
In other words, your analogy is good as far as it goes, but it doesn't
go far enough. -- Nathaniel