From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clerew.man.ac.uk)
Date: Thu May 06 2004 - 08:45:49 CDT
In <opr7iu2qh76hl8nm@clerew.man.ac.uk>
"Frank Ellermann" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
(forwrded by Charles Lindsey) writes:
[Frank, I think you will have to use some email address without 'nobody'
in it when writing to this list. We have tried before, and failed, to get
any respinse out of Kent Landfield to fix his majordomo.]
>Charles Lindsey wrote:
>> 1. The Subject header should be initialized based on that of
>> the parent article.
>Yes.
>> 2. Copying the Subject header exactly is an acceptable
>> initialization.
>Maybe. At least better than "random string" or "void".
>> 3. If the Subject header of the parent does not being with
>> "Re: " then prepending "Re: " is an acceptable
>> initialiation.
>Yes. In fact it's the normal initialization.
>> 4. Nothing else is an acceptable initialization.
>Maybe. In conjunction with 2 it's okay.
>> I have asked "who could live with my text"
I take this as indicating that Frank could live with my proposal. So that
makes 7 could live with it (albeit with some reservations about the
precise wording) and 2 could not. Even Eivind had now proposed a text
consistent with Seth's 4 points, though he is unhappy with my wording.
So I think the rough consensus is now established in principle, although
the wording may yet change.
My intention now is to publish the draft as it now stands, and then to
explore wordings to deal with these issues in USEAGE. After that, we can
return to the Usefor wording.
I am away for the next 4 days, and would expect to publish the draft when
I get back (unless there are some problems arising from my latest
Injection-Date changes).
-- 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@clerew.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