Re: Comments on MIME/SGML
Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu> Wed, 09 March 1994 16:32 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07090; 9 Mar 94 11:32 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07086; 9 Mar 94 11:32 EST
Received: from dimacs.rutgers.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09823; 9 Mar 94 11:32 EST
Received: by dimacs.rutgers.edu (5.59/SMI4.0/RU1.5/3.08) id AA24662; Wed, 9 Mar 94 11:17:00 EST
Received: from WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU by dimacs.rutgers.edu (5.59/SMI4.0/RU1.5/3.08) id AA24658; Wed, 9 Mar 94 11:16:59 EST
Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (8.6.4/2.8c-UTK) id LAA15404; Wed, 9 Mar 1994 11:06:26 -0500
Message-Id: <199403091606.LAA15404@wilma.cs.utk.edu>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
To: Jim Conklin <conklin@ivory.educom.edu>
Cc: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>, Ed Levinson <elevinso@accurate.com>, Multiple Recipients of List <ietf-822@dimacs.rutgers.edu>, MIME/SGML discussion group <mime-sgml@infoods.mit.edu>, moore@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Comments on MIME/SGML
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Mar 1994 09:10:26 EST." <94Mar9.091029est.83115(3)@ivory.educom.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 1994 11:06:24 -0500
X-Orig-Sender: moore@cs.utk.edu
Jim Conklin writes (on text/sgml vs application/sgml)... > Representing (I believe) lots of relatively unsophisticated users, I'd like > to push for keeping text reserved for only the very simple things, please. The other thing that top-level types are used for is gateways that have to do translation. text/* types will probably be translated for readability by humans instead of by machines -- so the charset might be translated even if it involves some loss of information, and a content-transfer-encoding of 8bit might be converted to quoted-printable instead of base64, even though the latter encoding is probably "safer". The goal is to make it readable according to the conventions for "text" in the destination environment. Body parts of type application/*, on the other hand, probably aren't useful unless you (a) have the right application and (b) have all of the bits intact. So gateways are more likely to preserve such information for these types, rather than translate it to something. I believe the latter behavior is more likely to be appropriate for SGML documents. Keith
- Comments on MIME/SGML Daniel W. Connolly
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Tim Berners-Lee
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Daniel W. Connolly
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Ed Levinson
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Ed Levinson
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Ed Levinson
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Daniel W. Connolly
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Jim Conklin
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Steve Dorner
- Re: Comments on MIME/SGML Keith Moore