Article View: comp.mail.misc
Article #3879Re: (not an) RFC: mailbox format
From: Marc VanHeyningen
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:54
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:54
14 lines
1178 bytes
1178 bytes
Thus said stanley@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley): >Is there any good reason why MIME chose to go with its own version of >binary encoding instead of using UUENCODE? > >While there are some systems that can't pass UUENCODEd data (converting >one ASCII character to something else, as I recall), UUENCODE IS almost >universally available, while MIME is not. This is exactly why. It doesn't do much good for the recipient to have uudecode available if the data was munged somewhere along the way. By the way, MIME didn't invent base64 encoding out of thin air, but borrowed it from the PEM RFCs. Followups set to comp.mail.mime.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Jan25.115416.29196@news.cs.indiana.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!rutgers!news.cs.indiana.edu!mvanheyn@raisin.ucs.indiana.eduReferences:
<MS-C.727914241.1103527590.mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM> <1k0u3kINNq3v@gaia.ucs.orst.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!rutgers!news.cs.indiana.edu!mvanheyn@raisin.ucs.indiana.edu From: mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu (Marc VanHeyningen) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.mime Subject: Re: (not an) RFC: mailbox format Message-ID: <1993Jan25.115416.29196@news.cs.indiana.edu> Date: 25 Jan 93 16:54:07 GMT References: <MS-C.727914241.1103527590.mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM> <1k0u3kINNq3v@gaia.ucs.orst.edu> Followup-To: comp.mail.mime Organization: Computer Science Dept, Indiana University Lines: 14 X-Quoted: 42%