Simon St.Laurent wrote: > 2) I worry about the link to RFC 3023 over time. If RFC 3023 has > successors, will that require a new publication of this document? This > document is in large part a reference to that RFC. What's a good way to address this? > 3) It might be worth taking the opportunity to get rid of the text/ > mess. The discussion of misleading charset information might be a very > good place to do that. I think I agree with what you're proposing, but let's be sure... are you talking about rev-ing 3023 to discourage text/xml? -TimReceived on Tuesday, 21 May 2002 20:35:42 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:51 UTC