Re: C.T.E. and message/partial

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Clive D.W. Feather (clive@demon.net)
Date: Thu Jul 05 2001 - 05:50:35 CDT


Brad Templeton said:
> Um, this is going in circles. I'm proposing that the standard require
> that the software _technically_ handle articles of a least "X" (where X
> to my mind would be in the 5MB range though some like 1MB)

Fine.

> These sites would not say "we want the megabyte articles if they are
> annoyingly split up into 20 parts" It doesn't want them at all.

That's a no-sequitor. You have no knowledge of their reasons for wanting
the limit, so you can't assume that that's the reason.

> Anyway, it probably is time to end this. I mainly wanted to defend the
> philosophy (while we still have the chance and the switch to
> message/partial from multi-article uuencodde has not yet begun) that
> article disassembly and reassembly belongs in the transport tools, not the
> article format.

Possibly, but we aren't going to see the tools change in the appropriate
timescale.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive@demon.net>   | Tel:  +44 20 8371 1138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive@davros.org>  | Fax:  +44 20 8371 1037
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | DFax: +44 20 8371 4037
Thus plc            |                            | Mobile: +44 7973 377646


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.