From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Thu Dec 28 2000 - 13:55:29 CST
J B Moreno <planb@newsreaders.com> writes:
> If the reader (person) sees it and wants to address it, then some extra
> steps (or at least different steps) have to be taken to make that
> possible, but that is no different than asking what the zip code is or
> who was the famous person that you are quoting in your sig was -- if the
> user wants to comment upon the sig then he can do so, just as he can
> comment upon your Organization header or anything else he wants to. But
> in neither case should it be automatically included as part of the
> quoted text.
I'll pipe up on this one and say that I think this has no business
whatsoever in this standard. This is a GNKSA thing.
My news reader doesn't distinguish between signatures and body when
quoting and I like it that way and would explicitly configure it that way
if I had to. When the thing that you think news readers should do is
something that other people want to turn off and that isn't actively
dangerous (like cancelling other people's posts), it doesn't belong in a
standard. An informational RFC like one of the netiquette RFCs or the
GNKSA, sure.
As they would say in the C standardization world, this is a quality of
implementation issue.
-- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>