From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Feb 22 2002 - 06:25:02 CST
In <20020221095444.A13875@dora.tertius.net.au> Thorfinn <thorfinn@tertius.net.au> writes:
>Definitely. Also, there is a difference between modifying Sender: and
>*adding Sender: when there is none*.
>Disallowing modification of Sender: (ie, if there is one, you reject the
>article, or you accept it, don't mess with it either way) is not the
>same as disallowing adding of Sender: if there isn't one.
>I personally don't think either should be disallowed, but there is
>definitely a middle ground to be had, and I'm entirely willing to accept
>anything up to Modification and Adding is SHOULD NOT, but don't like the
>idea of them being MUST NOTs.
The current draft is MAY for adding it (but with a discouraging NOTE) and
a SHOULD NOT for changing it if it is already there. That seems to be
within the range of what you find acceptable, and roughly in the middle of
the opposing tensions from others. So I hear no consensus for change (but
if anyone wants to review the wording of the NOTE, I am listening).
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5