From: Usenet News Support (support@deathstar.prodigy.com)
Date: Thu Jun 03 2004 - 14:56:02 CDT
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Charles Lindsey wrote:
Since the list is once again not accepting my messages, feel free to quote
this. The damn list is required to be open, I don't know why it
isn't! Sometimes it works, more often it doesn't.
> OK, so that is now the official text, except that I have added one word
> "can":
>
> It would be wiser for any followup agents which can detect apparent non-
> standard back-references such as "Re(2): ", "Sv: ", etc. to refrain
> from prepending anything further, but other attempts to mend that
> problem are likely to do more harm than good.
I offer again the suggestion that a back reference (or potential BR) be
defined as "any sequence of non-blank characters ending in a colon and
followed by a blank." That would give some false positives, they clearly
don't hurt if Re: is not added as long as the References header is
present, and will detect all examples I've seen in this list so far.
-- bill davidsen SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center Project Leader, USENET news http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com Please send usenet-related mail to news-support@prodigy.net