At 06:28 PM 2/2/02 +0100, Jacob Palme wrote:
At 19.00 +0100 01-10-03, Graham Klyne wrote:
OTOH, this does not prevent some other protocol from reusing the same
name, possibly with modified syntax, parameters, etc, but hopefully for
some related purpose. For example, RFC 2616 does some markedly different
things with its Content-Type header (but well within the spirit of MIME).
Hopefully, there will be just one *defining* RFC.
You have a counterexample yourself, "Date:" which has
different syntax in mail and http.
Yes, indeed. Since I wrote that I have been persuaded to a different
viewpoint, which is reflected in the current draft.
#g
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research Content Security Group
<Graham(_dot_)Klyne(_at_)Baltimore(_dot_)com> <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------