• To: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Subject: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• From: Alaric B Snell <alaric@a...>
• Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:36:57 +0000
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <20031121121743.GD2712@m...>
• References: <001401c3afc4$c3c479b0$650aa8c0@BOBDEV> <3FBDF2C4.1090900@a...> <20031121121743.GD2712@m...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030704 Debian/1.4-1

John Cowan wrote:

> 
> Of course, a *real* PER encoding of your email would be to encode the
> author as 01, and then leave the content to be reconstructed by the
> receiver.  :-)
> 

Am I that predictable? :-)

ABS

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>

• References:
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>
  • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: Alaric B Snell <alaric@a...>
  • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• Next by Date: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• Previous by thread: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• Next by thread: RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread