On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 03:35:02PM -0700, Ben Hartshorne wrote: > On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 03:52:28PM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote: > > Vineet Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > mutt doesn't want to change because it's using the open standard > > > correctly and m$ doesn't want to change because it's using the open > > > standard incorrectly. > > > > It's not a standard, yet. > > > > Strictly, I guess you're right. But then, MIME itself isn't a standard > yet either. Nor are most of the "standards" we deal with on the 'net > every day, it seems. My reference page was http://www.rfc-editor.org
Having attended some IETF conferences, I can assure you that there is a middle ground between "wildly experimental proposed standard that you can safely ignore", and "set in stone standard that everyone must adhere to". For example, once an RFC is set on the standards track, is not yet a standard, but it certainly carries more force than an RFC which is not on the standards track. Oh well. Enjoy your day :) -- Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better Micromuse Ltd. | than a perfect plan tomorrow. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Patton
pgpnksjzojo4g.pgp
Description: PGP signature
