On Sat, 3 May 1997, Stan Ryckman wrote:

> At 07:07 PM 5/3/97 -0400, F. Leon Wilson wrote:
> [...]
> >
> >The case of the list name and/or server is important if users and
> >list owner's are using filters that are case sensitive.
>
> Why would anyone use a case-sensitive filter on fields that are
> (by the RFC's) case-insensitive?  (i.e., anything to the right of "@".)
> You need to deal with [log in to unmask] because that's legal and
> equivalent to [log in to unmask] .

Because many discussion groups agree/set standards on predefined message
header formats and filter on exact matches.  Exact matching: for many
mail programs usually triggers the rule if any of the fields you filter
on contains the trigger text anywhere; if you want a mailing program to
trigger only on an exact match, then one enters a special character
(usually a caret (^)) as the first character of the trigger text. Doing
this means that the rule will only trigger if the header and the match
are the same length and contain the same characters. The match is
*always* case-sensitive -- this cannot be changed even for an exact
match.  The newbies soon learn this and adjust their postings accordingly.

Just because a format is legal, does not mean it is good to use or it
should be used.  In the case of my lists, I keep it simple and straight
forward.  I state up front "here's how it's going to work . . ."  Those
who want to be cute (because it's legal)  can start their own list and be
as cute as they want to be. Meanwhile, I'm running a smooth and HAPPY list.

>
> >Plus one can invest a lot of time into creating an aesthetically pleasing
> >look to the list.  Details are important.
>
> Aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder.  If the case in headers is
> your biggest worry in running a list, you're lucky.  (For now  :)

I do feel most fortunate with all of the lists I'm running.  The only
problems that I am having are "how do I do this . . . " or making things
happen from the technical side of things.  I must confess I'm enjoying
learning all of the "new" commands and issues.

F. Leon
AGGRESS

> > Cheers, > Stan
>