On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 07:22:23PM -0400, Lorenzo Taylor wrote: > 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. It would have to be a voluntary type standard. The Unix flat-file standard is pretty played out, I'd say. Interesting local-file formats use clever databases and so forth to make virtual folders work. It seems like we should have moved past the flat-file format years ago. I've had similar ideas recently about using XML for conf files in /etc, but that would take a bit of elaboration. I'll save that for another time. > <body> > <quote> > I think you are an email junky. > </quote> > <response> > No I'm not! I have attached the reason why not. > </response> Incidentally, this would response to the other fellow who asked how to extend the XML format to interspersing quotes with responses. You could even do something like <body> <quote messageID="foo"> Some stuff </quote> <quote messageID="bar"> Some stuff from another message </quote> <reply> Some stuff that I wrote about: <quote messageID="aThirdMessageID"> Some tripe </quote> </body> -- Stephen R. Laniel steve@laniels.org +(617) 308-5571 http://laniels.org/ PGP key: http://laniels.org/slaniel.key
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature