Re: structured documents [draft-hopmann-collection-props-00.txt]

(Whoops--I set the Reply-To: on my last post so that I would
get replies after I left Netscape; but I just realized it'll
make it hard for some people to reply to the list.  So I'm

Larry Masinter wrote:

> If support for structured documents is needed for
> interoperable
> clients, then it should only be "optional" in the sense of
> another
> set of collective features which form yet another standard
> for
> which 'conformance implies interoperability'.
I'm wondering whether we actually want a new
structured-document model.  Rhetorical question: What's
wrong with multipart/related?

|John (Francis) Stracke    |My opinions are my own.|S/MIME supported  |
|Software Retrophrenologist|==========================================|
|Netscape Comm. Corp.      |In the long run, there is no middle ground|
|      | between justice and genocide.            |

Received on Tuesday, 12 January 1999 19:00:01 UTC