On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Dan Langille wrote:
> Hubert: I know you've already seen this response from Adam, but it 
> didn't get CC'd to the list.  Hence this second message.

Actually, I don't see it here... dunno what went wrong again. :/


> > Wouldn't it be clearer to not stuff all that data as parameters into the
> > MESSAGE and FILE tags, but rather give them sub-items(or what's that
> > called?):
...
> So, I guess that's where I stand; responses are always welcome...

It was just a quick idea without mugh thought behind - and as a matter of
taste as you say it's not that important either. As long as it doesn't
make parsing more difficult - fine! :)


 - Hubert

-- 
Hubert Feyrer <hubert@feyrer.de>