In <199903110806(_dot_)DAA28190(_at_)black-ice(_dot_)cc(_dot_)vt(_dot_)edu>
Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu writes:
Is the proletext proposal something that would be upward-compatible
with the current F=F draft? Or can it be made so? The last thing
we need to do is progress the current draft, and then go look
at a subtly different scheme from proletext - you *know* that at
least one major vendor will attempt to re-use the display engine
and Get It Very Wrong if it's incompatible. ;)
I think so. But I doubt proletext would ever be just another format of
text/plain if/when it got proposed for an RFC. It would presumably be
text/proletext.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Web:
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Voice/Fax: +44 161 437 4506 Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5