Sender: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 29 Dec 2006 11:37:59 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII |
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-transfer-encoding: |
7BIT |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On 29 Dec 2006 at 9:26, Christopher Wilson wrote:
> Are there any restrictions as to which keywords can be specified in a
> shared keywords file?
No.
> Specifically, could the new "Configuration-Owner" keyword be placed
> there? What about exits?
Yes.
The only "restriction" is in being careful about how the included
keywords mix with the keywords in the header. The resulting header
has to make sense and be a valid header.
The .IK directive acts just as if the keywords were in the header, in
the place where they are. If some keywords are duplicated in the
header and the keyword file, there may be some unintended
consequences.
If the header has a duplicated keyword, for example
Keyword=A
<other keywords>
Keyword=B
then that is interpreted as:
Keyword=A,B
So if for example, you have a header like this:
[log in to unmask],Quiet:,[log in to unmask]
.IK kwfile
and the kwfile has:
[log in to unmask]
then C will be a quiet owner along with B, and A will be a nonquiet
owner.
However, if the header has:
.IK kwfile
[log in to unmask],Quiet:,[log in to unmask]
then C will be a non-quiet owner, and the primary owner.
If the keyword file contains a keyword that is only allowed to have
one parameter and the header also contains that keyword, then you
will get an error.
And so on. But as long as the resulting headers make sense, anything
can be in the keyword file.
--
Francoise Becker
There is only one LISTSERV(R) -- the product that launched the
email list communication industry in 1986. To discover the
story behind LISTSERV, visit:
http://www.lsoft.com/corporate/20anniversary.asp
|
|
|