> 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?