On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 19:32 -0800, Michaelwagner wrote: > pfarrell Wrote: > > But as a standard for someone to use to write working and interoperable > > code, ID3 is terrible. Maybe the worst that I've ever tried to work > > with.
> True. I've written code to read ID3 tags, and was stymied by ambiguities > in the document, contradictions between different versions of the same > standard, lack of examples, lack of a test suite, etc. I think this is the universal reaction. My code, in Java has been on my website for ages. > > Maybe the worst that I've ever tried to work with. > Oh, I think RFC822 and followons rival it. Not that 822 isn't clear. But > in point of fact no one follows the standards much, so what you really > have to do to parse email headers is a lot of other stuff besides, that > is nowhere documented. I liked 822. Of course, I knew the guys who wrote it, used a Tops-20/Tenex machine that used the syntax that it refers to, so it all makes sense to me. But doesn't everyone just use some library rather than implementing mail from the RFCs? -- Pat http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
