Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 18:39:12 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Chris Fedde <chris@fedde.littleton.co.us> Cc: "Bill A. K." <billieakay@yahoo.com>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IE for FreeBSD Petition Message-ID: <20000522183912.B78939@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <200005220441.e4M4fBp08044@fedde.littleton.co.us> References: <20000522093603.B77130@freebie.lemis.com> <200005220441.e4M4fBp08044@fedde.littleton.co.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday, 21 May 2000 at 22:41:11 -0600, Chris Fedde wrote: > On Mon, 22 May 2000 09:36:03 +0930 Greg Lehey wrote: > +------------------ >> I think this is a very bad idea. Look at your mail message for one >> good reason why: Microsoft software is just plain broken. You >> probably don't even realise that your message was written without line >> breaks. Isn't it much easier to read like this? > +------------------ > > Before we start calling the kettle black we might want to check the color > of our own pot. Your mailer included the following headers. > > Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia > Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 > Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 > Mobile: +61-418-838-708 > WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog > > Unless something has changed recently I don't beleave that these are > valid headers by any interpretation of the appropriate RFCs. Unless something has changed recently, I believe that these are valid headers by interpretation of RFC 822: optional-field = / "Message-ID" ":" msg-id / "Resent-Message-ID" ":" msg-id / "In-Reply-To" ":" *(phrase / msg-id) / "References" ":" *(phrase / msg-id) / "Keywords" ":" #phrase / "Subject" ":" *text / "Comments" ":" *text / "Encrypted" ":" 1#2word / extension-field ; To be defined / user-defined-field ; May be pre-empted <snip> extension-field = <Any field which is defined in a document published as a formal extension to this specification; none will have names beginning with the string "X-"> user-defined-field = <Any field which has not been defined in this specification or published as an extension to this specification; names for such fields must be unique and may be pre-empted by published extensions> <snip> 4.7.4. EXTENSION-FIELD A limited number of common fields have been defined in this document. As network mail requirements dictate, addi- tional fields may be standardized. To provide user-defined fields with a measure of safety, in name selection, such extension-fields will never have names that begin with the string "X-". Names of Extension-fields are registered with the Network Information Center, SRI International, Menlo Park, California. 4.7.5. USER-DEFINED-FIELD Individual users of network mail are free to define and use additional header fields. Such fields must have names which are not already used in the current specification or in any definitions of extension-fields, and the overall syntax of these user-defined-fields must conform to this specification's rules for delimiting and folding fields. Due to the extension-field publishing process, the name of a user- defined-field may be pre-empted Note: The prefatory string "X-" will never be used in the names of Extension-fields. This provides user-defined fields with a protected set of names. > At best these should be inside a Comments: header or perhaps > preceded by an X- to indicate that they are not standard. As RFC 822 says, it's probably not a bad idea, but it's not required. The worst problem I could encounter would be that some new extension might redefine the meaning of one of my headers. I suspect that's not going to happen in the immediate future. > Current convention appears to be to slap these into a xcard or vcard > format encapsulated in MIME. Do you have an RFC for this convention? The format suggests Microsoft. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000522183912.B78939>