At 00:23 08/08/03, The Purple Streak, Hilarie Orman wrote:
Text markup and presentation seems like an end system application. I can't
see any advantage to having it done as part of delivery. It would make
a lot of sense to have the marked-up text available for translation into
several different formats (pdf, word, html) even after the initial delivery,
so it does not seem like an OPES application.
Unfortunately (fortunately?) this cannot be the case for three main reasons:
1. the support of the existing systems. Today we still have Bind 4 in
operation on many name servers. We will still have current MUAs for a long.
2. this will protect the users interest as every user does not necessarily
need a complex MUA able to support many features in addition to the today ones.
3. the IAB/IETF trend is to refuse the users demand in that area expressed
by language groups such as Eurolinc (of which I Chair the WG-IDN). The
demand is for Vernacular Names, ie names which are the ones used in real
life (language, law, programs, documents, geography, culture, peoples
names, etc.). This means for example the support of case-sensitive mailboxes.
In making their support an option that an OPES may filter out, we permit
them to develop while keeping continuity
Anti-spam, though, seems like a good OPES application. It involves delivery,
it involves using an existing protocol (SMTP) embedded inside another
protocol state machine, it only needs to be done once as part of message
delivery.
Anti-Spam as filtering needs to be odnne once as a part of the mesage
delivery. But anti-spam by dialog between sender's and receiver's OPES
through OCP is an interesting feature which may add to value added mail
services. An example is an acknowledgement system. Mail system does not
support any mail delivery reporting. Using frontal Mail Opes might permit
it with a mail control tower among a community. It could permit meta /
common archiving too. etc.
jfc