Re: draft-ietf-impp-cpim-msgfmt syntax

John,


Thursday, November 7, 2002, 12:43:07 PM, you wrote:
John> If I remember correctly, I was in favor of using XML for headers when
John> this topic was discussed, but the consensus was that XML is too
John> verbose and on that basis, 2822 style headers were preferred.

the real irony here is that the verbosity argument has often been used
against the textual syntax of 822/2822.

The problem with the argument for headers is that it is worrying about an
inefficiency that has no effect on system performance.

If they are in a short message, then the message is short and who cares
about the theoretical inefficiency of the header syntax?

If they are in a long message, then the headers will be a tiny fraction of
the total message, so who cares cares about....

d/

-- 
 Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email protected]>
 TribalWise <http://www.tribalwise.com>
 t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850




  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]