the "Re:" (was Re: Differences between RFC 2822 and Usefor)

From: Henry Spencer (henry@spsystems.net)
Date: Thu May 01 2003 - 16:36:57 CDT


On Thu, 1 May 2003, Pete Resnick wrote:
> Given that this is dicussing the contents of a clearly unstructured
> field, I think this belongs in USAGE and not in the syntax document.

As proposed in March, there is no "syntax document". Document #1 is
article format, "syntax and semantics".

One could argue that "Re:" is part of the semantics of Subject. However,
I am inclined to agree that it's a "soft" enough issue, sufficiently
non-critical to interoperation, to belong in USEAGE (document #3).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7.