>Jeez, here we go again, just like in the archives. It's NOT a tab, and
>it's *NOT* inserted by a mail system. *LISTSERV* inserts SIX (6), that's
>S I X spaces before the [RARS]. I just checked (again). A message came
>in for approval with "Subject: MISC: whatever". I resent it -- untouched
>-- to the list. On the list it appears as "Subject:      [RARS} MISC:
>whatever". Some mail readers (including mine) hide the spaces, but if
>you look at the raw mail with an editor they are there, and they cause
>problems with software that is too brain-dead to realize the RFCs allow
>extra spaces.
>
>Unless there is a pressing reason to keep them, LSOFT ought to get rid of
>the extra spaces in future versions.
[. . .]

I don't know if this is a pressing reason or not, but it's pretty clear
that LISTSERV does this to improve legibility of headers.  This is similar
to the nice way it sets up the "Received:" lines:

>Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LISTSERV release 1.8c) with
>          NJE id 6013 for [log in to unmask]; Thu, 20 Aug 1998 15:19:54
>          +0200
>Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE
>          (LMail V1.2c/1.8c) with BSMTP id 3220; Thu, 20 Aug 1998 15:09:52
>          +0200

Similarly, the following lines are lined up:

>Date:         Thu, 20 Aug 1998 00:14:18 -0700
>Subject:      Re: excess spaces after subject:
>Content-Type: text

For what it's worth, I sent mail to Microsoft complaining that its handling
of subject headers was non-RFC822-compliant, but I never heard back from
them.

I'd agree that, if it's easy to do, L-Soft should consider getting rid of
the inserted spaces in the "Subject:" line, but I wouldn't consider it too
high a priority since it's just an inconvenience and it's caused by the
noncomplience of the mail clients.

-jwgh