In <01K599ICUXMY0000AQ(_at_)mauve(_dot_)mrochek(_dot_)com>
ned+ietf-822(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com writes:
However, a single encoding is not sufficient. Regardless of the encoding
chosen, people will send stuff that's incorrectly encoded and people will want
to fix it up. And forbidding canonicalization midstream has been tried in the
past, and in practice has proven to be a complete waste of time. You can write
as many standards as you like and bellow about this all you want, but when a
vendor is faced with the alternative of propogating something that's broken and
which results in a downstream failure and fixing that something so it works,
the choice the vendor will make is the latter. Customers demand solutions and
don't care about standards violations, and if they cannot get satisfaction from
one vendor who behaves in a purist way they will switch to another that
doesn't.
Yes, News had this problem, though I think writers of news transports are
getting the message at last. Certainly, according to the USEFOR draft, any
morphing en route is a very severe MUST NOT. But the News situation is
simpler in that, if some site is broken abd other sites ostracise it, the
news still floods around the offending site.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk 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