Re: Microsoft's "I mean it" content-type parameter

When HTTP has solved this problem, could you guys head over to the  
SMTP groups and let them know? They struggle with the "This-Is-Really- 
No-Spam" header for quite some time without making a break through.


Am 06.07.2008 um 18:00 schrieb Frank Ellermann:

> Eric Lawrence wrote:
>> keep in mind, however, that most folks (even the ultra-web engaged
>> on these lists) see but a small fraction of the web, especially
>> considering private address space/intranets, etc.
> Yes, but a general philosophical problem with any "do what I mean"
> flag applies:
> (1) A relevant fraction of the Web got it wrong, using x=y where
>     they should have said x=z.
> (2) Therefore you couldn't trust that x=y means x=y, introducing
>     some "what is x divination".
> (3) That annoyed another relevant fraction of the Web who really
>     want x=y when they say x=y.
> (4) You add an "I mean it" flag for (3), sticking to "divination"
>     as default for (1).
> (5) In theory protocols, software, and config files are upgraded
>     to add those new "I mean it" flags everywhere.  As that is a
>     worldwide upgrade stunt you lose a major fraction of the Web
>     sticking to (1) or (3) without this flag.
> (6) Another major fraction does what you want, among them a part
>     of (1) now saying "x=y I mean it" when they clearly want x=z.
> (7) SNAFU, your flag made it worse.
> Some problems can't be solved in specifications because it's a
> problem with folks never reading specifications.
>  Frank

<green/>bytes GmbH, Hafenweg 16, D-48155 Münster, Germany
Amtsgericht Münster: HRB5782

Received on Monday, 7 July 2008 06:59:25 UTC