At 12:16 23/02/04 -0500, Keith Moore wrote:
Let me put it another way.
1. I really don't think we should standardize a header field pointer to
mail archives that depends on HTML and HTTP.
:
3. However, I don't think that we should limit such a standard to be
used exclusively with IMAP or any other protocol. Clearly it's much
easier to deploy HTTP archvies than IMAP archives.
On this, we agree.
And there is nothing in Martin's draft that has any such dependency.
So I don't think there is a problem with [1] on these grounds.
(I've skipped the rest of your message: I did read it, and I agree with
some points you make, and not with others, but I don't think they're really
germane to the specification on the table.)
#g
--
[1] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt
------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact