On 8/19/98 at 11:43 AM -0700, Laurence Lundblade wrote:
At 3:32 PM +0100 8/14/98, Ian Bell wrote:
There are actually two sorts of lines that are not terminated by "soft"
line endings: those that form the last lines of paragraphs and those
that are not intended to be wrapped at all. The distinction is vital but
this draft seems to confuse the two.
Actually, the last lines of paragraphs are not the problem: The flowing
travels with the SP-CRLF at the end of the previous line, so the last line
of a paragraph always looks like it is attached to the previous line,
whereas a line that ought not be wrapped is not proceeded with a SP-CRLF.
The problem is with single-line paragraphs. In those cases, you can't tell
if it is OK to rewrap it.
However the solution is to generate different MIME parts for flowed and
non-flowed text. I'm not sure how often this will be done in practice, but
I feel this is a completely viable option.
I disagree. The idea here was to get rid of crap in MUAs that can't handle
other than plain text. MIME separators are no bargin in that arena.
If we can come up with some way to mark single line paragraphs (two spaces
at the end of a line? a tab instead of a space?), I think that would
complete the picture for this document.
I would suggest that the draft say that all line breaks are ends-of-flows
or ends-of-paragraphs and all text is candidate for wrapping. If you want
no wrapping (when possible) you should put it in a different MIME entity.
No, this is Chris's complaint about needing double-returns for tables.
Unacceptable.
We should also say in the draft that long "words" (runs with no spaces) are
allowed and should be formatted as best as possible by the receiver.
I don't see real necessity for this, but have no objections.
pr
--
Pete Resnick <mailto:presnick(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com>
QUALCOMM Incorporated
Work: (217)337-6377 or (619)651-4478
Fax: (217)337-1980 or (619)651-1102