Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!THUMPER.BELLCORE.COM!nsb From: nsb@THUMPER.BELLCORE.COM (Nathaniel Borenstein) Newsgroups: comp.mail.multi-media Subject: Re: Multi-media mail standards; Forw: Use of ODA in the Internet Message-ID: Date: 14 Aug 90 19:57:50 GMT References: <8am5IKe00hl=8CV1dx@andrew.cmu.edu> Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: inet Organization: The Internet Lines: 17 Excerpts from mail: 14-Aug-90 Re: Multi-media mail standa.. Jim Morris@andrew.cmu.ed (393) > Whatever its technical merits and demerits PostScript is strategically > well-positioned because everybody translates into it already. Yes, the real question is: what are we talking about? If we're talking about "how to get multimedia mail working right away for people, no matter what the cost in technical correctness" then yes, PostScript is a good candidate. If we're talking about "what should CCITT committees be thinking about in formulating ultimate standards for multimedia documents" then I think they should be steered away from PostScript at all costs. The bottom line is that multimedia mail and printers are very different beasts, and a printer-oriented standard would be a real straitjacket for multimedia mail. -- Nathaniel