Re: weemail (was Proposal to define a simple architecture ...)

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:28:46 +0200, jfcm <info(_at_)utel(_dot_)net>  said:

> Thi sis true. But as far I understand there are only two options:
> 1. the address is to be to a mail server. xxx(_at_)wwww(_dot_)xx and then 
> access 
> commands in the core of the text
> 2. or there are a limited set of formated entries in the header.
>
> The weemail's need is for a free format extended header - for customized 
> parameters.
If you can quantify the parameters and extensions well enough to put them
in an I-D, we'll take a look.   There's nothing that says we can't add stuff - 
we
added 'format=flowed' to text/plain, and there's been other things tweaked
over the past decade of MIME.

Keep in mind that except for the actual reference parameter, /external-body
carries around a bunch of other headers describing what you are going to fetch.
 It might be a good idea to think about it more generally, as additional info
intended to help me decide if I want to fetch a remote part is probably
remarkably similar to info that would help me decide whether to open a local
part (It's often the case that *opening* that .doc format file will involve
launching OpenOffice or a PDF viewer - on my laptop, this ends up being more
resource-intensive than downloading the file). 

> This is aslo the old "dump net/smart host vs smart net/dump terminals" 
> story. As community oriented we are more interested in "smart net/smart 
> host". This is true, you may see/object to it both ways.
As a community *we* may be interested in both the net and host being "smart".
There are certain large groups with lots of money that wish that the average
host be barely smart enough to consume media only in the ways that the provider
intended.  Think "XBox/WevTV with DRM stuck on it" - there's a LOT of people
who want that to work.

pgpR8z1mzZpXK.pgp
Description: PGP signature