Re: text/enriched comments

[Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think Rhys is right on the mountain/molehill score.  But beyond that,
you've pointed out several things that I will happily accept as textual
changes to the text/enriched spec:

1.  I'll do something about the wording regarding "\n" in the sample program.

2.  I'll at least mention that the final 

putc('\n', stdout);

is only needed in line-buffered environments.

3.  I think we can handle the close-verbatim/open-verbatim problem with
some advice to implementors, which I'll go ahead and add; basically, it
never had occurred to me that someone would split a line there, and I'll
just add a recommendation against it.  Sound OK?

4.  I'll add a mention that formatting command names are case-insensitive.

5.  I'll try to figure out why the sample parser botches the stream:

> <param><<</param>

6.  I'll add a "nofill" environment.  What the heck....

Sound reasonable?  -- Nathaniel