Earlier today, Eric Thomas responded to Dan Wheeler's suggestion for a change in error message subject headers by saying: >The problem is that I'm afraid "KIDCAFE Error" is not a reasonable >subject line for normal lists, and the combined length would certainly >exceed your 40 bytes limit. Your average not-that-long 'From:' field is, >say, [log in to unmask] which is 28 bytes long, and the >significant parts are to the right. I wonder whether a wording different from the one Dan originally suggested might address both Dan's concern and Eric's response. For example, instead of Dan's suggestion, which was > 4 IN%"[log in to unmask] 4-AUG-1992 KIDCAFE Error From: [log in to unmask] what about the following: > 4 IN%"[log in to unmask] 4-AUG-1992 Error notice from: [log in to unmask] As the example shows, this omits the wording to which Eric objected but includes enough of even the longer "mailer-daemon" addresses so that listowners could usually tell from just the subject header whether this was a new problem. It doesn't say which list the message concerns, but my guess is that that's less important information than whom the message is from. Joan Korenman, WMST-L Listowner KORENMAN@UMBC Univ. of MD. Baltimore County [log in to unmask] Baltimore, Maryland 21228-5398