At 10:59 AM -0600 3/13/98, Ned Freed wrote:
(This, BTW, is what I meant when I said wrap=yes is "too easy" in and of
itself. I knew this that this requirement would need to be added and I knew
the folks at Qualcomm would object to it.)
N O N S E N S E. We don't object to it. Our software has, and has A L W A
Y S had, an option to send wrapped text/plain that would warm the cockles
of your little vt100-loving heart. And it is turned on B Y D E F A U L
T. So knock off the slams.
Knock off seeing slams that are not there, either implicitly or explicitly. I
never said your software was incapable of generating text/plain. I know full
well that it is.
What I said, and all I said, is that I expected Qualcomm people to object to
this requirement. And my expectations on this matter have been met quite
handily: You have objected, Pete has objected, and Lawrence has objected. If
need be I will cite chapter and verse from mail messages I've received from
each one of you to prove this point.
These are good faith implementations that comply with the standard
as it is written. We don't violate the trust people have placed in us in
such cases
The "no line breaks necessary" wasn't written in any standard until 2046,
and people writing software to the older spec were doing so in perfectly
good faith, too.
So what? The fact remains that the requirement is there and in a draft
standard, one that has been out for quite some time. As I have told you several
times now, you need to deal with this fact. You cannot change it at this point.
Ned