Hi, Alex, Quite bizarrely, I did not get this message in my inbox, nor even in my spam folder. Thanks, GMail! :-|
At 2022-01-24T22:32:13+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > Some wish. For the following code: > > [ > .MT [email protected] > Alejandro Colomar > .ME . > ] > > The produced html output is > > <a href="mailto:[email protected]";>Alejandro > Colomar</a> > > The visual output shows the full name, but when you want to send an > email, that is discarded. It would be nicer, IMHO, to have the > following code: > > <a href="mailto:Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]>">Alejandro > Colomar</a> > > Any thoughts? My main question about this is, is it permitted by RFC 6068? https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6068#page-3 My quick glance over the meaning of an "addr-spec" suggests that it is not, but I have not read this standardese in depth. If it's standards-complaint and can be widely expected to work, that helps, but then we might need an additional argument for the MT macro to specify or suppress the addition you're proposing. For instance, if someone clicked such a link from a man page that editorialized as follows... .SH Bugs Hyphens, minuses, dashes, horizontal arrow extensions, and open doors in vertical walls in NetHack are all the same to us, but try telling that to .MT [email protected] the jackasses who maintain groff .ME . ...it could lead to unintentional entertainment. Regards, Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
