Kinoshita-san,
At 4:54 PM 12/7/94, Satoshi Kinoshita wrote:
I don't understand why the conformity to rfc822 depends on MIME.
Please forgive the confusion of my previous response. Let me try to state
my meaning again, perhaps more clearly.
RFC822 was written with an extremely simple view of the body. Lines of
ascii text. There was no mechanism provided for labeling "interesting"
differences among bodies, such as differences in character set or natural
language. This was a major deficiency. Hence, anyone using pure RFC822,
without the benefit of Mime, is not able to label such details in a
standard fashion.
This forced different communities to develop "private" conventions. I say
private because the conventions do not interoperate with other communities.
The conventions that were developed are usually valid for RFC822 syntax,
but they do not interoperate for interpretation of bodies.
THAT is why I say that such communities need MIME to achieve proper
interoperability.
Or, is the necessity of labeling written in rfc822?
no, it was not. THAT is the problem.
d/
--------------------
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg Consulting Phone: +1 408 246 8253
675 Spruce Dr. Fax: +1 408 249 6205
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Email:
dcrocker(_at_)mordor(_dot_)stanford(_dot_)edu