< To reach closure, let me observe that the proposal I made for using the
< encoded word to pass non-ascii filenames is one which does not have to be
< implemented in this version of the MIME document. If it is truly backward
< compatable, then when and if the use of richer-than-ascii characters begin
< to see widespread use, the access types can be refined in a separate
< document. Resolving the issue now may only have the effect of delaying a
< solid, useful, extensible and needed protocol.
Would adding in the use of an encoded word have to delay the document?
Tony Hansen
hansen(_at_)pegasus(_dot_)att(_dot_)com,
tony(_at_)attmail(_dot_)com
att!pegasus!hansen, attmail!tony