Re: Second, revised MDN Implementation Report

> I (obviously) agree that the disposition codes need to have demonstated
> interoperable semantics to be retained. It makes sense to trim the list to
> only those that have been demonstated to be useful.  Keeping a longer list 
> of unused dispositions carries a cost to those that must provide machine
> translations without any present value.  This is not the case with DSN where 
> a default and appropriate phrase, icon, or color can be maintained without
> needing extra code to support the possibly unused detail digit.  

seems like a stretch - (a) is it really harder to provide a default for
unrecognized keywords, and (b) isn't there at least some need to support
MDNs generated according to the old RFC?

Keith