On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 10:03 +0100, Michael Haardt wrote: > As I said, there is no consensus on this. Let's note that, following > the result of past discussions on RFC 2822, we won't agree on it, too.
Quite possibly -- and that's why I said 'my answer'. I was just interested to see if I was missing a good reason why an MUA would _want_ to mangle its input rather than displaying what was actually sent. I can see the justification in the case of MIME errors where we can guess at what was intended and fix it up. I can see the justification in the case of a small display window, which cannot easily display text which was generated with the assumption of an 80-column display. But in the _common_ case I just don't understand why you'd want to mess with it. Strictly speaking, UK law permits taxi drivers to urinate against the left-hand rear wheel of their carriage. Yet, in general, they do not take advantage of this. They don't argue that "we're allowed to do it, so we're going to"; they merely refrain from doing it because they don't really have to and it doesn't make much sense. -- dwmw2 -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
