LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for MHTML Archives

MHTML Archives

MHTML Archives


Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font


Join or Leave MHTML
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives

Subject: Re: Implementation status form
From: Jacob Palme <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:IETF working group on HTML in e-mail <[log in to unmask]>
Date:Thu, 6 Nov 1997 05:53:04 +0100

text/plain (44 lines)

At 13.22 -0800 97-11-05, Einar Stefferud wrote:
> Speaking as MHTML Chair;-)...
> It seems to me that our need for implementation reporting has a
> deadline just before we need to decide about advancing from Proposed
> to Draft Standard Status, but not sooner.
> What we need then is to determine which pats of our standard have two
> (or hopefully more) independent implementations that actually do
> interoperate and interwork.
> We do not need to know about developer's intentions before they
> implement or before they annouce their products.  So, I do not see any
> reason to invade their privacy by asking for advanced information
> about product plans.

But since we can expect that future users of e-mail will be using
many different products for e-mail, it is also very important that
different developers of e-mail products develop compatible products,
so that a user of product A can easily send mail to a user of
product B and the reverse. This is made easier with more detailed
forms of what each developer has done and plans to do. For example,
it is not very valuable if A sends messages in multipart/alternative
format, if B cannot receive them in a good manner. Or it is not very
valuable if A sends messages containing URLs which must be resolved
via http look up from the web, if B cannot handle such messages.

The better we make e-mail work, the larger will the market be for
use of e-mail. Hiding information from other developers might in
the short run increase the market share of one company, but in the
long run I believe all benefit by making e-mail work better so that
the total market size increases.

I also think my form can be used as a checklist by implementors
to check which facilities they might consider to include in their

Shall I make a shorter and simpler form? I can do it if you
want. Or I could mark certain questions in the form as of more

Jacob Palme <[log in to unmask]> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL:

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main MHTML Page



CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager