From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz (Shmuel+gen@patriot.net)
Date: Fri Aug 06 2004 - 13:48:31 CDT
In <Pine.LNX.4.53.0408052156580.24159@a.shell.peak.org>, on 08/05/2004
at 10:13 PM, John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> said:
>I understand the proposed definition just fine, smartass,
Then you don't understand the meaning of "circular".
>"A followup is an article with a References header" and then we are
>told when that header MUST and SHOULD be provided.
Clearly not circular. For it to be circular that MUST and SHOULD would
have to refer to the term followup.
>This malarky leaves us with the problem that there can never be a
>followup, since an article being created doesn't start with a
>References header,
What gives you that idea? It strats with whatever the agent puts in it
initially. If it is a folloup agent and is creating a response to
another article then the new article *does* start with a References
header field.
>See the nice circle?
The one that exists only in your head?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)