* Michael Tatge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-30 13:35:04 +0100]: >NO. It's "> " Period. Please don't make a new OT thread out of this, >especially you David. ;-)
Well, I just did some googling and found a bunch of sites about quote characters; none of my attempts at searching the RFCs turned up anything useful, but I don't think I was using very good search terms. There doesn't seem to be an authoritative answer on this, despite what one of the eminent presences on this list implied a while back (in private; hence why I changed from "> " to ">" in the first place...). So, while I'm definitely interested in following the standards, there doesn't seem to be one. Eliminating the space saves data, but more importantly it allows one more character to fit actual text into. Couple this with the fact that I've never heard of a mailer that triggered on "> " for a quote, but not ">", and I don't see a compelling reason to switch back. Feel free to point out the authoritative source if there is one; I've changed my mutt settings plenty of times in response to things people say here (most recently my attribution string). By the way, Sven, you might want to check out this URL, I'm getting a 403 error: http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/message/editing.html -- Hi David! :)
msg26453/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
