|
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 1 May 1991 21:15:27 +0200 |
In-Reply-To: |
Message of Wed,
1 May 1991 10:02:58 EDT from "Forum on LISTSERV release 1.6"
<LSTSRV-L@SEARN> |
Reply-To: |
|
On Wed, 1 May 1991 10:02:58 EDT "Duane D. Weaver" <WEAVER@OHSTVMA> said:
>Here is one of two responses on the UCLAMAIL list. Any comments Eric?
From now on '>' is Leonard Woren and '>>' is Duane:
>> I believe that there is a problem with how ACCESS handles X-To:
>> records.
>
>The fault is equally LISTSERV's.
RFC822 does not assign any meaning to tags starting with "X-", and never
will. These tags are reserved for "user-defined fields". LISTSERV uses
this field to place some extra information for the human reader; ACCESS
uses them to convey internal information to another program. LISTSERV
also uses "X-LSVxxx" fields to hold internal information for peered
lists. Neither is doing something wrong as far as RFC822 is concerned. If
I had written ACCESS, I would not have used a tag name not containing the
program name/prefix for internal information, and I would certainly not
show such internal data to the end user (what would you say if you
started getting a bunch of "X-LSVxxx:" tags on each and every posting?).
Eric
|
|
|