At 03:34 PM 9/3/2002 -0500, Eric A. Hall wrote: >ACE is not the same as MIME. I have avoided making this argument because >the comparison is useful for introductory purposes, but there are subtle >yet strong differences at lower levels which keep them from being mirrors. > >Specifically, end-nodes typically extract data from MIME and use it within >the local context of that application *ONLY*. The encoded data is RARELY >used inside of other applications,
1. you are wrong about the range and frequency of venues for MIME data. 2. what difference does it make where the data are used, in terms of utility of IDNA? > On the other hand, domain names are >frequently cross-populated among applications, and as the argument >regarding clipboards shows, the encoded form will be the norm. The discussion about uses environment implementation and use is mostly doing a good job of showing that this is not a productive forum for discussing user environment implementation and use. Given the skillset of this community, that should not come as a surprise to anyone. >If all Internet applications had to support the MIME encoding formats for >all of their data -- FTP offering quoted-printable as a transfer type -- >then it would be equal to IDNA. Yeah. I guess that having MIME in both email and the web does not mean much. >Furthermore, MIME and its constituent application protocols are being >extended so that binary data *CAN* be transferred without being encoded >first. 10 years, Eric. 10 years. So far. And still counting. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850
