At 3:58 PM 1/5/95, Ned Freed wrote:
how last minute it is. I suggest that the current draft be modified
slightly to permit a comma-separated list of Content-Types in the protocol
parameter ("for future use"), and also relax the restrictions on "there
must only be two parts" a bit, and then move the draft forward as is.
The basic idea sounds interesting and reasonable.
The intent to leave it strictly as 'for future use' does not.
Things which are strictly 'for future use' almost never get used. The SNMP
security field is one of the classic examples.
The spec needs to have enough flesh to it to make this generality
real. If we have a clear, concrete, and reasonable sense of the way this
will be used, then fine. The spec needs to say it, so there isn't any
doubt. No, we don't have to have absolutely all of the details worked out,
but there needs to be enough substance to leave no doubt how this will turn
out.
d/
--------------------
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg Consulting +1 408 246 8253
675 Spruce Dr. fax: +1 408 249 6205
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
dcrocker(_at_)mordor(_dot_)stanford(_dot_)edu