On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 02:36:07PM +0200, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
> * On [010511 22:45] Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 2001-05-11 15:56:33 -0400, adam morley wrote:
> >> I've just been told that > > is non-standard though. which means
> >> we are distributing a software package that is non-standard. is
> >> that bad?
> > Is not _what_ standard? If we don't say "this is format=flowed", we
> > also don't have to emit "format=flowed".
> This "non-standard" refers to quoting levels, in conjunction with
> format=flowed text, how to consider quoted text, and what defines the
> quote depth, as far as I can make out.
> The relevant RFC is; RFC 2646 section 4.5.
> Though, from what I can make out from it, it doesn't apply when the
> text format is not format=flowed.(?)
non-format flowed text is definately a gray area, and open to a little interpretation
based on what is seen in multiple rfcs. i see what you are saying, and i understand
what thomas was saying.
>
> Lawrence
> --
> Lawrence Mitchell | http://members.tripod.co.uk/EVSvienna/
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
thanks
adam
any and all ideas herein are the sole property of the author, with no implied
warranties or guarantees. unless its somebody else's already.
