Re: Revising Richtext

[Greg Vaudreuil <gvaudre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> 1.  Is there anyone who cares to strongly argue AGAINST option #2?  (To
> recap, this says that lone newlines (CRLFs) in richtext are "soft", i.e.
> white space, and that sequences of N newlines, where N>1, are to be
> interpreted as N-1 hard newlines.)   Or, to argue AGAINST making the
> change at this time, despite Dave's procedural perspective?

A technical change in the protocol at this time will cause delay in
publishing the protocol.  A technical change will require an
additional 2 week review period with a new last call.  These are the
current rules for technical changes.  Editoral changes if required do
not require a new comment period.

If the richtext changes are significant enough to merit a new round at
Internet Drafts and a new comment period, then lets do it, but I
seriously doubt that the changes are worth the delay given the ability
to revise the protocol at draft standard stage in 6 months time.


Greg Vaudreuil
822 Extensions Working Group Chair