Excerpts from mail: 9-Sep-93 Re: text/enriched: Throwing.. Einar
Stefferud(_at_)nma(_dot_)com (1764*)
Are we trying to solve this great problem, or just trying to avoid
tripping over it in text/enriched?
Stef is right on the money, as usual. There is NO WAY that a format as
simple as text/enriched is going to solve a problem as thorny as "sender
intention versus recipient preferences", nor was it intended to. I
think we should be very careful not to overgeneralize this problem. The
text/enriched format is intended to be sufficiently rich to allow some
emphasis, etc., but explicitly NOT to provide WYSIWYG capability or
advanced formatting capability. Let's skip the grander problems and
concentrate on what should be in this less ambitious format.
If justification is fundamentally too controversial, perhaps we should
just declare that text/enriched doesn't support justification, nuke the
"flushboth" environment, and be done with it? I would not have a
problem with that, actually; I think that little is gained by it. (To
my mind, the most important things in text/enriched are things like bold
and italics. Really.) -- Nathaniel