RE: Meta non-discussion (could be ignored)

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp>]

> The only discussions going on in the 822EXT Working Group at present are
> related to finalizing the base MIME specification, finishing the
> richtext/enriched/simpletext specification(s), and (possibly) the
> Content-Disposition proposal.

> The only new discussions that would be appropriate for 822EXT at this
> point would be fundamental changes to the specification. No such changes are
> planned as far as I know.

As exemplified as above two quotations, your opinion is full of self
contradicitons.

> (You have now heard this from an Application Area Director and from one member
> of the Application Area Directorate.

I recommend you to think much more consistently and logically before
saying anything as an application area directorate.

> > According to the "Subject:", with this thread, we are discussing on the
> > general policy of this ML.
> 
> Yes we are. This all started when a proposal was made to move MIME character
> set discussions to the 822EXT Working Group.

Wrong. You should read mails with the subject "general policy", and you'll
find you are wrong.

> > I don't think this ML is the place to make too much detailed discussion
> > on features of MIME. Especially, what "charset" of MIME means should be
> > determined by 822ext as it can not be determined by this ML, of course.
> 
> I disagree. This list is precisely the right place for this discussion. It was
> created in order to cover this issue among others, as a matter of fact.

I must point out that there was no MIME specific discussion in the last
BOF.

> > You misunderstand IETF, then.
> 
> I disagree and I have presented plenty of documentary evidence to back up my
> position.

I have seen no documentary evidence presented by you.

> You, on the other hand, have only appealed to some esoteric logic
> that frankly escapes me.

Surely, logic escapes you.

							Masataka Ohta

PS

BTW, unlike area directors, an area directorate have, officially, no
power over IETF, I think. Am I correct?