I have been reading the XML tagging discussion, here is a
short summary of my understanding of the problem:
I don't agree at all with your assessment. In particular,
(b) Alternative- Easy to implement, Some mailers which
Content-Type parameter neat. do not know of this
parameter may be
confused.
is, in my opinion:
(b) Alternative- Avoids possible Hard to implement in
Content-Type parameter complications many environments, extremely
should many hard to deploy. Introduces
similar things many obvious silly states.
be needed in the
future.
And we have agreement, even from those who appose (a), of the disadvantages of
(b).
And (c) should be:
(c) Super- Gives MIME a badly All the problems of (b),
Content-Type parameter designed new must be very carefully
with some limited designed, and even if
object-oriented carefully designed is
capabilities. guaranteed to be abused.
My conclusion is that (b) seems to be the best alternative, unless
we want to really think through an object-oriented structuring of
subtypes.
My conclusion is that (a) wins overwhelmingly.
Ned