RE: Status of MARID WG?

["Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Andrew Newton [mailto:andy@xxxxxx] 

> On Nov 23, 2004, at 11:22 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> 
> > There is a difference between a prototype and a product. 
> Unfortunately
> > we
> > have a habbit of inflicting PERL lash up style schemes that 
> are really 
> > no
> > more than prototypes onto end users.
> 
> What's the saying... "Build a foolproof system and only fools 
> will use 
> it."

That has been the cry of the COBOL lobby, the FORTRAN lobby and every group
that has promoted an obsolete legacy product as the future.

> The computer sciences have been taking a 
> beating lately because the technology being produced cannot 
> be quickly grasped by simpletons.

Deservedly so.

> Well, guess what?  Despite all the research and will of the auto 
> industry, training and a drivers license are still required. 

But not for turning on the heater or a/c.

> After all, isn't the driver for mta-to-mta authorization 
> caused because our collective mothers simply will not take on this 
> responsibility with their click-driven MUAs?

I would argue that the need for the group is due to internet community
dumping an inadequate prototype for a spec onto the user base. SMTP is a bit
of an improvement over the days when email was a feature of FTP which was in
turn a feature of TELNET.