On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 02:19:17PM -0400, Hall Stevenson wrote: > As I recall from a past discussion/arguement/debate over this, > it had something to do with mutt actually doing something > wrong... Or was it a misconfiguration on some user's part in > their mutt config ??
None of the above, IIRC, but rather a case of mutt correctly implementing a standard which Microsoft refuses to support, even though the manner of their lack of support causes breakage. By failing to support the defined standard, MS is definitely doing something wrong. By refusing to bend the standard for the sake of interoperability with widely-used noncompliant software, mutt may or may not be doing something wrong, depending on your viewpoint. This closely parallels the recurring debate on the Mailman mailing list over whether Mailman is broken for including a large number of standards-compliant "List-*" headers in list mail, given that some existing mail clients display all unrecognized headers, thus annoying many subscribers. IMO, mutt and Mailman are both doing the right thing by properly implementing the relevant standards. You may or may not agree. -- When we reduce our own liberties to stop terrorism, the terrorists have already won. - reverius Innocence is no protection when governments go bad. - Mr. Slippery
