-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 6, 2006, at 2:09 PM, John Dennis wrote:
>> As I understand it, any user agent is free to throw on any X-header
>> their little heart desires, so that strikes me as a lack of a-priori
>> knowledge.
>
> No problem, silently ignore unknown fields.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 6, 2006, at 1:29 PM, emf wrote:
> Another approach would be something like:
>
> To [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ...
> X-Foo blarg
>
> I'm not against that.
It might sense to use RFC 2822 terminology:
To[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
???
I think you do proba
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 13:29 -0400, emf wrote:
Pardon my top post, these are all good points Ethan, it's clear you've
given it careful thought.
> Another approach would be something like:
> To [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah, that would work too, but it's a little awkward, I like your
original idea better
John Dennis wrote:
> O.K. that makes sense, but I guess it boils down to a design choice.
>
> 1) Well defined DTD/Schema, but awkward to use in practice.
Another approach would be something like:
To [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
X-Foo blarg
I'm not against that.
> 2) Easy to use, but no standardized
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 17:24 +0100, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>
> --On 6 July 2006 11:30:08 -0400 John Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure I understand what the purpose is in treating the extended
> > fields differently, it seems like it would overly complicate the xml
> > navigation wit
--On 6 July 2006 11:30:08 -0400 John Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand what the purpose is in treating the extended
> fields differently, it seems like it would overly complicate the xml
> navigation without any clear advantage. Anyone who is interested in the
> value
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 10:55 -0400, emf wrote:
> Hans G. Ehrbar wrote:
> > If mailman would be able to write an xml representation of
> > each message to a separate file, that would be wonderful.
> > Then one would be able to use xlst stylesheets to make
> > custom archives.
>
> I've looked into th
Hans G. Ehrbar wrote:
> If mailman would be able to write an xml representation of
> each message to a separate file, that would be wonderful.
> Then one would be able to use xlst stylesheets to make
> custom archives.
I've looked into this a bit, and so far have found only a few
schema-like thin
