On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 05:29:44PM -0400, adam morley wrote: > > my point is the reason for not violating said should clause is > archaic. my reason is that if your mail reader can't handle it, step > into the 21st century and get a reader that knows how to wrap text. Mail systems unpredictably truncate lines longer than (IIRC) 1023 characters. So you're likely to have truncated paragraphs and sure to tick off just about everyone with your arrogant attitude. If you want to break RFCs get a job with M$, where doing so seems to be a good career move. -rex
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Sam Roberts
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Thomas Roessler
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Thomas Roessler
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Thomas Roessler
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Thomas Roessler
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... rex
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message ... adam morley