The spec is indeed clear about whether the previous body part should
end or not end with a CRLF. What is not clear is whether the fact that
it DOES NOT end with a CRLF should imply anything about how the
following object should be presented in relation to it. [...]
You need additional presentation
information that can't be specified in MIME.
As you start getting into this, you find that it may be possible to
define some reasonable semantics, but those semantics are not universal
and therefore will be appropriate for some systems but inappropriate
for others. It's basically a can of worms, better left to a real
compound document format. The big win is probably going to be the work
to extend the URL syntax to be able to specify other objects in the
current message. That way you can use HTML as your compound document
format [...]
Never fear, HTML is its own can of worms. It gets you a bit further
but it is a lousy way to specify presentation of compound documents.
I agree with the basic approach, but HTML isn't up to the task yet.
Keith