- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 14:22:53 -0400
- To: "Mountain, Highland M" <highland.m.mountain@intel.com>
- Cc: "XML Distributed Applications List (E-mail)" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Last week at WWW2002, Rohit Khare mentioned something that I believe demonstrates why a RFC 822/2822 binding is not a protocol binding. During one of our Developers Day protocols panels, he suggested that the behaviour of the "Bcc" header depended upon the semantics with which the message was transferred. For example, if a message that was constructed with this SMTP binding were transferred with HTTP (a perfectly valid thing, since HTTP also uses RFC 822), then the Bcc header would be passed through, rather than being treated as hop-by-hop. The processing of Bcc in the expected way *requires* that it and the message be tranferred with email semantics. The only way that this can currently be done, since there exists no abstract description of what an email binding entails, is to bind the message to an email transfer protocol. I don't particularly care which one is used, though I believe SMTP is the only widely deployed standardized one. Thanks. MB -- Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2002 14:14:52 UTC