W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > May 2001

Re: multipart/alternative extension

From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:47:40 -0500
Message-Id: <a05100300b71c9db331d7@[216.43.25.67]>
To: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
Cc: pkyone@netreon.com, Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se>, IETF Applications Area general discussion list <discuss@apps.ietf.org>
On 5/7/01 at 2:42 PM -0400, Keith Moore wrote:

>  > If IETF says that multipart/alternative should be used, such
>>  a server will still not use it, since using multipart/alternative
>>  will cause many recipients to only get one of the translations,
>>  not adapted to their language capabilities.
>
>The same is true if you use either multipart/mixed or multipart/choices.

No. Please re-read Jacob's message. It is acceptable to use either 
/mixed or /choices because you won't *lose* information in any 
clients. With /alternative, there is information loss in some 
clients, which the servers in question are unwilling to risk.

You're not following the argument, Keith.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick <mailto:presnick@qualcomm.com>
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
Received on Monday, 7 May 2001 14:48:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 March 2006 20:11:28 GMT