Re: OT (and Flamebait): Top-Posting
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Stephen R Laniel's comments on Re: OT (and Flamebait): Top-Posting were as follows:
# On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 02:52:41PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
# <message>
# <messageWereReplyingTo>
# This is some stuff that a guy wrote
# </messageWereReplyingTo>
#
# <whatWeSayInResponse>
# I disagree vehemently with whatever you said
# </whatWeSayInResponse>
# </message>
Wow! I really like the XML approach. But how are you going to get all the
email programs in the world to use it? It seems too late to make such a smart
new approach to email a standard now as old as email is. Then again, if HTML
email is accepted in so many circles, (not here but ...) why not XML email
everywhere? It's a much better approach than anything that has been thought up
thus far.
Let's take it one step further:
<message>
<from name="Me" address="me@me.net" />
<to name="You" address="you@you.com" />
... multiple recipients get their own <to> headers
<cc name="Somebody Else" address="somebody@else.org" />
... same as to for multiples
... other headers in same format ...
<body>
<quote>
I think you are an email junky.
</quote>
<response>
No I'm not! I have attached the reason why not.
</response>
<quote>
You read too much email.
</quote>
<response>
It gives me something to do.
</response>
</body>
<attach filename="notajunky.xml" type="application/xml"
description="Why I'm not an email junky" size="26k">
Put a file in here. The program will do all this for you
including filling in the size and mimetype.
</attach>
</message>
Hey. I can dream can't I?
Lorenzo
- --
- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS d- s:+ a- C+++ UL++++ P+ L+++ E- W++ N o K- w---
O M V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5+ X+ R tv-- b++ DI-- D+
G e* h---- r+++ y+++
- ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCzbkvG9IpekrhBfIRAkXYAKCHhQ4nKE4fEV2YArIw0OK6cI88WQCgy3R9
ARILUYT6gyjJbn0GFv/wxcE=
=ldlR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: