Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 17:36:24 GMT From: ruth moulton <ruth@muswell.demon.co.uk> To: Sue Blake <sue@welearn.com.au> Cc: ruth@muswell.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: FW: Email [was: Squid will that be fried ?] Message-ID: <199803261736.RAA00424@muswell.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <19980327025609.38906@welearn.com.au> References: <4B5AD1A1DC97D1118E720060976D80F40DDB@msx.xch.net> <19980327025609.38906@welearn.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sue > I find this approach reprehensible, no matter which company does it. > I don't like paying any software company to make me look a fool. > Many different companies have tried. another point of using standards is so that we can all communicate, no matter whose software we're using. It's fine for Claris or MS to do their own thing, and maybe they do it better, but it doesn't help the rest of us using other o/s or software if they do it * in a proprietry way, * do not openly publish what it is they're doing * re-do functionallity rather than participate in the global standards process to get the open standards right etc etc. e.g. I seem to get application/ms-tnef body parts from MS Outlook which I believe may be receipt notifications, why doesn't it use Message Dispostion Notifications which are defined openly in a draft RFC - (which also contain human readable and machine readable parts) and so on Ruth -- ================================================ Ruth Moulton ruth@muswell.demon.co.uk Consultant 65 Tetherdown, London N.10 1NH, UK Tel:+44 181 883 5823 -- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199803261736.RAA00424>