Fwd: Re: Extra Header field

[Martin Konold]

Am Samstag, 10. Juli 2004 18:16 schrieben Sie:

Hi,

> > I like the idea because it speeds up the common case. But I
> > think that the header should only be a hint for efficiency
> > but not a requirement.
>
> Well if there is no header it is treated as a RFC2822/non-Kolab message, so
> the XML format will be lost. It should be a requirement.

Putting a requirement in a mail header is dangerious on one hand (preserving
headers is sometimes not guaranteed) and on the other I don't understand why
in the case of the missing extra header the XML format gets lost.

Regards,
-- martin

Dipl.-Phys. Martin Konold

e r f r a k o n
Erlewein, Frank, Konold & Partner - Beratende Ingenieure und Physiker
Nobelstrasse 15, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
fon: 0711 67400963, fax: 0711 67400959
email: martin.konold at erfrakon.de

-------------------------------------------------------

-- 
-- martin

Dipl.-Phys. Martin Konold

e r f r a k o n
Erlewein, Frank, Konold & Partner - Beratende Ingenieure und Physiker
Nobelstrasse 15, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
fon: 0711 67400963, fax: 0711 67400959
email: martin.konold at erfrakon.de