> From:         WAGNER@DBNGMD21
> > Gee, I was hoping that you might be able to influence the logic
> > for the HEADERS with regard to lines over 80, as well as text as
> > you proposed.
>
>   Whatever for?  There already is a continuation convention for
>   headers.
 
Oh?  Surprise me... what is it?
 
The only one I know about is inserting at least one blank on the continued
lines, which neither WISCNET nor FAL abide by under all circumstances for
all headers.
 
> > The "feature" of starting continued lines in column 1 seems to be
> > a carryover from WISCNET into FAL.
>
>   I don't understand this comment (but then, I didn't like WISCNET
>   when we ran it either).  Starting in column 1 is illegal 822.
 
Right, but tell that to WISCNET and FAL.
 
> > Q: does RFC822 allow a line to be broken in the middle of a quoted
> > field?
>   Yes, of course. Quoting 822, section 3.4.5
...
> > MAILER barfs on it.
>   Why doesn't this surprise me?  (hmmm...wonder what UCLA MAIL does
>   with it) (says he with a gleam in his eye).
 
I'm sure we'd welcome a rewrite of MAILER.  Are you willing?