Mark Crispin wrote: > > I note that there is an I-D, draft-kohn-news-article-00.txt, which > addresses Usenet mail format in a compatible fashion without introducing > the major incompatibilities that would be inflicted on other protocols > (including IMAP) by adding raw, untagged UTF-8 to news message headers. I > also note that there is a charter revision in progress for Usefor.
[...] > The Kohn I-D suggests a means to accomplish what is necessary without > inflicting major incompatibilities and mandates upon other protocols. > There's a few minor nits with that document, but it definitely appears to > be a step in the right direction. [...] > IMAP is messaging, and the sooner that people stop thinking about "news" > and "mail" and start thinking about "messaging", the better. I agree. I have quietly been monitoring this discussion and I'm am dumbfounded as to why the netnews community seems to want to single out the usenet format as special/different/unique/superior/pioneering. I view IMAP, POP3, NNTP and SMTP as different ways of moving around the same content. I should be able to ingest an article via NNTP, read it via IMAP, forward it off to someone else via SMTP and have them read it via POP3 all without having to alter the content. If a change needs to be made in the message format to satisfy the needs of one of the protocols, then the change should be made in a backwards compatible way for all of them. The Kohn draft attempts to do exactly this. Is there some fundamental flaw in my thinking? If there is, please enlighten me. -- Kenneth Murchison Oceana Matrix Ltd. Software Engineer 21 Princeton Place 716-662-8973 x26 Orchard Park, NY 14127 --PGP Public Key-- http://www.oceana.com/~ken/ksm.pgp
