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

Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023

To: ietf-xml-mime@xxxxxxx, WWW-Tag <www-tag@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
From: MURATA Makoto <murata@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 21:25:06 +0900
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-xml-mime.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-xml-mime-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <> <>
Sender: owner-ietf-xml-mime@xxxxxxxxxxxx

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 03:50:11 +0200
Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Depends on the format. Formats should provide means to specify
> the encoding, if they do not they are BAD, broken as designed.

If we really promote in-band declarations, we should recommend 
one mechanism for all textual formats.  I think that CSS style 
declaration (@chaset) is the best I have seen.  If the TAG recommends 
this mechanism for all formats except XML and HTML, that would 
be one reasonable principle.

Cheers,

-- 
MURATA Makoto <murata@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
  - From: Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
  - From: Martin Duerst

References:
- Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
  - From: Tim Bray
- Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
  - From: Bjoern Hoehrmann

Prev by Date: Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
Next by Date: Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
Previous by thread: Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
Next by thread: Re: Requesting a revision of RFC3023
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread