Re: Newsgroups

[stanley@xxxxxxxx]

"Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> Having both these practices in use at the same time produces total
> confusion.

Our attempt at defining the "right" meaning will not prevent that, since 
it is already happening. The only way there is confusion is if anyone 
thinks that "newsgroups" in email HAS a meaning. If they know it does not,
then there is no confusion at all.

> Jacob Palme raised this about 10 years ago, and was all for
> introducing an ID to deal with it.

I was working with him on that. I know all about it.

> We warned him off ...

> ... and what I propose to put in USEAGE is
> the way we agreed to fix it.

I don't recall agreeing to define a header directly contrary to existing 
usage. Nor do I recall any agreement with Jacob that "warned him off" by
proposing a fix that is directly contrary to existing usage. What I do 
recall is the draft we were working on died a natural death because we 
could not define it to mean something when two competing opposite 
definitions were already in existance -- and that was a decade ago, IIRC.

> Whichever way we fix it, it is bound to upset someone, but not fixing it
> at all will upset everyone.

Not so. Our attempt at redefining existing usage will not be a fix, it 
will be a fiasco. The only reasonable "fix" we could apply would be to 
make it official: "a newsgroups header in email means nothing", since the 
only problem is when someone thinks it does mean something, and it cannot
mean two opposing things.