Re: What's the 'part' in 'multipart'?

[Einar Stefferud <Stef@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am sure glad that you now seem to have come together on this.

Regarding "singlepart" ...

> How about this approach?  When "multipart" appears as a nested part,
> it describes an entire 822 message, and the headers associated with it
> can include P2 content headers.  The parts under it are attachments.
> Then we add a "singlepart" content-type, which is semantically
> identical to "multipart", but can contain only a single part and thus
> does not need the boundary markers.  This is just to make things
> pretty; it is not useful otherwise.

I feel that "singlepart" conveys exactly the right user semantic, and
will seem very natural to users who would otherwise be puzzled (or
baffled) by the use of "multipart" when there is really only one part.

Again, think of yourself explaining this to a room full of Personell
Department users.

How much time do you want to spend explaining that: 

	"Technically we can do it with a single named TYPE,
	so in the interests of conservartion we saved you 
	from using two different words."  

Good luck...\Stef