On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:36 PM, David Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What *is* the appropriate process when a monopoly abuses its position in
> defiance of a standard?
>
> Vote with your feet & suffer the (admittedly minor) consequences. If you are
> interested, here's my bug report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evolution/+bug/257101
>
> I also logged it as a 'brainstorm' idea... and no one would vote for it
> because THEY said it's a bug! lol
>
> - D
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Vik Olliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 15:14 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
>> > The reason it shouldn't be used is that it isn't in the standard.
>>
>> So the choices are:
>>
>> (1) Get Microsoft to adhere to the standards, or
>> (2) Implement an exception allowing optional non-strict interpretation
>> of the standard.
>> (3) Let Open Source users suffer by rigidly adhering to the standard.
>>
>> So, (1) is impossible, (2) is practical, and (3) only benefits people
>> who don't adhere to the standard.
>>
>> What *is* the appropriate process when a monopoly abuses its position in
>> defiance of a standard?
>>
>> Vik :v)
>>
>
>
Problem that I see is that the semicolon seems to be defined for
something elses in RFC 2822:
3.4. Address Specification
Addresses occur in several message header fields to indicate senders
and recipients of messages. An address may either be an individual
mailbox, or a group of mailboxes.
address = mailbox / group
mailbox = name-addr / addr-spec
name-addr = [display-name] angle-addr
angle-addr = [CFWS] "<" addr-spec ">" [CFWS] / obs-angle-addr
group = display-name ":" [mailbox-list / CFWS] ";"
[CFWS]
