[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Human-readable notation language



On 12 Oct 2005, at 9:04 AM, David Shaw wrote:


Section 5.2.3.16 (Notation Data) has this:

     First octet: 0x80 = human-readable. This note value is text, a
                         note from one person to another, and need
                         not have meaning to software.

To my reading, this says more or less, "this is a note from one person
to another except when it isn't".  Especially given such notations as
preferred-email-encoding@xxxxxxx which are always human-readable, I
suggest this:

First octet: 0x80 = human-readable. This note value is text.

It's just simpler.


Yes, but. The reason we have that text in there is because of debates over what to do about it. The present text says that software doesn't have to anything. Yes, I know that other parts of the document also say that *any* subpacket that you don't understand can be ignored (modulo critical), but that doesn't mean that the issue won't come back again.

That text also more or less says, "You can ignore these any time you want to. Really. Yes, really. Uh huh. Trust me, really." It says this because that has been needed.

I'm happy to remove it, but I get an "I told you so" when someone asks about it later.

Jon