ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Campaign started for 2022

1994-12-03 17:04:46
On Sat, 3 Dec 1994, Dave Crocker wrote:

My point is that it's probably ok to cite the behavior, but let's not
change our specs to give people permission to do it globally.

Agreed.  How about the following:

    In the absence of a MIME-Version: field, the recipient (whether
    MIME compliant or not) may choose to believe anything about the
    body of the message, as it may contain text using a pre-MIME
    localized encoding (or anything really).  There is no rule which
    can determine which encoding has been used with 100% accuracy,
    but localized defaults may be useful.  MIME MUA's are encouraged
    to support such localized defaults on received messages only, or
    the adoption of MIME MUA's in some regions may be impeded.

    The use of such encodings without a MIME-Version field and a MIME
    charset specification is highly discouraged as it impedes
    interoperability when sending messages between regions with different
    localization conventions.  MIME MUA software must always include
    an apropriate charset specification on sent messages.

    It is encouraged that non-MIME MUA software be upgraded (when
    convenient) to include an apropriate MIME charset specification on
    sent messages even if nothing else in MIME is supported.  This
    upgrade will have little, if any, effect on non-MIME recipients
    and will aid MIME MUA's to accurately choose the correct display
    behaviour.  It also provides a smooth transition path to eventual
    adoption of other MIME features.

Better?

Cheers,

Rhys.
-- 
Rhys Weatherley, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
E-mail: rhys(_at_)fit(_dot_)qut(_dot_)edu(_dot_)au  "net.maturity is knowing 
when NOT to followup"

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>