From: Henry Spencer (henry@spsystems.net)
Date: Fri Aug 09 2002 - 13:41:43 CDT
On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Charles Lindsey wrote:
> So in that case the mail you received would be a MIME multipart with
> two parts, the second being the encapsulated article...
> Likewise, an enthusiastic poster might send you half a dozen articles
> encapsulated in the one email. Again, it is up to you whether to bother
> with such unusual complications.
I'm concerned that we are leaving the door open for lots of random
complications and diversity of this sort, when the moderators have already
made it clear that they're going to have difficulty dealing with even the
simplest and most tightly-specified encapsulation.
I don't think that it is a good idea to leave these choices up to the user
and/or implementor. The implementors have amply demonstrated their
ability to do stupid things when the spec leaves the choice open. We're
punting this problem to the moderators, rather than solving it; this
strikes me as unwise.
> > The draft should specifically call for "usage=moderate" (batches being
> > legitimate only when "usage=relay" is present or implicit) and/or should
> > make it clear that only one article may appear within.
>
> Actually, that is what it already says.
What I'm suggesting is that submissions to moderators should be required
to be usage=moderate; it *doesn't* already say that.
Henry Spencer
henry@spsystems.net