From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz (Shmuel+gen@patriot.net)
Date: Sun Mar 14 2004 - 20:48:32 CST
In <200403141653.i2EGrZr29572@panix5.panix.com>, on 03/14/2004
at 11:53 AM, Seth Breidbart <sethb@panix.com> said:
>Please tell me exactly what behavior is permitted by one but not the
>other, at any level (MUST, SHOULD, MAY).
Please address what I actually wrote instead of asking me to defend
statements that I never made. The wording that you proposed implies
that it is preferable to add the "Re: "; the wording from RFC 2822
does not imply that. Please explain why if there was no difference you
wouldn't just accept the wording from RFC 2822.
>People who read Usenet find it useful.
People who read Usenet also find it a hindrance.
>Any suggestions that UAs should _add_ it for display when it isn't
>present but a References: header is will be laughed at.
Please stop raising red herrings. You are the only one to have
suggested such behavior.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)